what is summary of research

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Summary – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Research Summary – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Summary

Definition:

A research summary is a brief and concise overview of a research project or study that highlights its key findings, main points, and conclusions. It typically includes a description of the research problem, the research methods used, the results obtained, and the implications or significance of the findings. It is often used as a tool to quickly communicate the main findings of a study to other researchers, stakeholders, or decision-makers.

Structure of Research Summary

The Structure of a Research Summary typically include:

• Introduction : This section provides a brief background of the research problem or question, explains the purpose of the study, and outlines the research objectives.
• Methodology : This section explains the research design, methods, and procedures used to conduct the study. It describes the sample size, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
• Results : This section presents the main findings of the study, including statistical analysis if applicable. It may include tables, charts, or graphs to visually represent the data.
• Discussion : This section interprets the results and explains their implications. It discusses the significance of the findings, compares them to previous research, and identifies any limitations or future directions for research.
• Conclusion : This section summarizes the main points of the research and provides a conclusion based on the findings. It may also suggest implications for future research or practical applications of the results.
• References : This section lists the sources cited in the research summary, following the appropriate citation style.

How to Write Research Summary

Here are the steps you can follow to write a research summary:

• Read the research article or study thoroughly: To write a summary, you must understand the research article or study you are summarizing. Therefore, read the article or study carefully to understand its purpose, research design, methodology, results, and conclusions.
• Identify the main points : Once you have read the research article or study, identify the main points, key findings, and research question. You can highlight or take notes of the essential points and findings to use as a reference when writing your summary.
• Write the introduction: Start your summary by introducing the research problem, research question, and purpose of the study. Briefly explain why the research is important and its significance.
• Summarize the methodology : In this section, summarize the research design, methods, and procedures used to conduct the study. Explain the sample size, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
• Present the results: Summarize the main findings of the study. Use tables, charts, or graphs to visually represent the data if necessary.
• Interpret the results: In this section, interpret the results and explain their implications. Discuss the significance of the findings, compare them to previous research, and identify any limitations or future directions for research.
• Conclude the summary : Summarize the main points of the research and provide a conclusion based on the findings. Suggest implications for future research or practical applications of the results.
• Revise and edit : Once you have written the summary, revise and edit it to ensure that it is clear, concise, and free of errors. Make sure that your summary accurately represents the research article or study.
• Add references: Include a list of references cited in the research summary, following the appropriate citation style.

Example of Research Summary

Here is an example of a research summary:

Title: The Effects of Yoga on Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction: This meta-analysis examines the effects of yoga on mental health. The study aimed to investigate whether yoga practice can improve mental health outcomes such as anxiety, depression, stress, and quality of life.

Methodology : The study analyzed data from 14 randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of yoga on mental health outcomes. The sample included a total of 862 participants. The yoga interventions varied in length and frequency, ranging from four to twelve weeks, with sessions lasting from 45 to 90 minutes.

Results : The meta-analysis found that yoga practice significantly improved mental health outcomes. Participants who practiced yoga showed a significant reduction in anxiety and depression symptoms, as well as stress levels. Quality of life also improved in those who practiced yoga.

Discussion : The findings of this study suggest that yoga can be an effective intervention for improving mental health outcomes. The study supports the growing body of evidence that suggests that yoga can have a positive impact on mental health. Limitations of the study include the variability of the yoga interventions, which may affect the generalizability of the findings.

Conclusion : Overall, the findings of this meta-analysis support the use of yoga as an effective intervention for improving mental health outcomes. Further research is needed to determine the optimal length and frequency of yoga interventions for different populations.

References :

• Cramer, H., Lauche, R., Langhorst, J., Dobos, G., & Berger, B. (2013). Yoga for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Depression and anxiety, 30(11), 1068-1083.
• Khalsa, S. B. (2004). Yoga as a therapeutic intervention: a bibliometric analysis of published research studies. Indian journal of physiology and pharmacology, 48(3), 269-285.
• Ross, A., & Thomas, S. (2010). The health benefits of yoga and exercise: a review of comparison studies. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 16(1), 3-12.

Purpose of Research Summary

The purpose of a research summary is to provide a brief overview of a research project or study, including its main points, findings, and conclusions. The summary allows readers to quickly understand the essential aspects of the research without having to read the entire article or study.

Research summaries serve several purposes, including:

• Facilitating comprehension: A research summary allows readers to quickly understand the main points and findings of a research project or study without having to read the entire article or study. This makes it easier for readers to comprehend the research and its significance.
• Communicating research findings: Research summaries are often used to communicate research findings to a wider audience, such as policymakers, practitioners, or the general public. The summary presents the essential aspects of the research in a clear and concise manner, making it easier for non-experts to understand.
• Supporting decision-making: Research summaries can be used to support decision-making processes by providing a summary of the research evidence on a particular topic. This information can be used by policymakers or practitioners to make informed decisions about interventions, programs, or policies.
• Saving time: Research summaries save time for researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders who need to review multiple research studies. Rather than having to read the entire article or study, they can quickly review the summary to determine whether the research is relevant to their needs.

Characteristics of Research Summary

The following are some of the key characteristics of a research summary:

• Concise : A research summary should be brief and to the point, providing a clear and concise overview of the main points of the research.
• Objective : A research summary should be written in an objective tone, presenting the research findings without bias or personal opinion.
• Comprehensive : A research summary should cover all the essential aspects of the research, including the research question, methodology, results, and conclusions.
• Accurate : A research summary should accurately reflect the key findings and conclusions of the research.
• Clear and well-organized: A research summary should be easy to read and understand, with a clear structure and logical flow.
• Relevant : A research summary should focus on the most important and relevant aspects of the research, highlighting the key findings and their implications.
• Audience-specific: A research summary should be tailored to the intended audience, using language and terminology that is appropriate and accessible to the reader.
• Citations : A research summary should include citations to the original research articles or studies, allowing readers to access the full text of the research if desired.

When to write Research Summary

Here are some situations when it may be appropriate to write a research summary:

• Proposal stage: A research summary can be included in a research proposal to provide a brief overview of the research aims, objectives, methodology, and expected outcomes.
• Conference presentation: A research summary can be prepared for a conference presentation to summarize the main findings of a study or research project.
• Journal submission: Many academic journals require authors to submit a research summary along with their research article or study. The summary provides a brief overview of the study’s main points, findings, and conclusions and helps readers quickly understand the research.
• Funding application: A research summary can be included in a funding application to provide a brief summary of the research aims, objectives, and expected outcomes.
• Policy brief: A research summary can be prepared as a policy brief to communicate research findings to policymakers or stakeholders in a concise and accessible manner.

Advantages of Research Summary

Research summaries offer several advantages, including:

• Time-saving: A research summary saves time for readers who need to understand the key findings and conclusions of a research project quickly. Rather than reading the entire research article or study, readers can quickly review the summary to determine whether the research is relevant to their needs.
• Clarity and accessibility: A research summary provides a clear and accessible overview of the research project’s main points, making it easier for readers to understand the research without having to be experts in the field.
• Improved comprehension: A research summary helps readers comprehend the research by providing a brief and focused overview of the key findings and conclusions, making it easier to understand the research and its significance.
• Enhanced communication: Research summaries can be used to communicate research findings to a wider audience, such as policymakers, practitioners, or the general public, in a concise and accessible manner.
• Facilitated decision-making: Research summaries can support decision-making processes by providing a summary of the research evidence on a particular topic. Policymakers or practitioners can use this information to make informed decisions about interventions, programs, or policies.
• Increased dissemination: Research summaries can be easily shared and disseminated, allowing research findings to reach a wider audience.

Limitations of Research Summary

Limitations of the Research Summary are as follows:

• Limited scope: Research summaries provide a brief overview of the research project’s main points, findings, and conclusions, which can be limiting. They may not include all the details, nuances, and complexities of the research that readers may need to fully understand the study’s implications.
• Risk of oversimplification: Research summaries can be oversimplified, reducing the complexity of the research and potentially distorting the findings or conclusions.
• Lack of context: Research summaries may not provide sufficient context to fully understand the research findings, such as the research background, methodology, or limitations. This may lead to misunderstandings or misinterpretations of the research.
• Possible bias: Research summaries may be biased if they selectively emphasize certain findings or conclusions over others, potentially distorting the overall picture of the research.
• Format limitations: Research summaries may be constrained by the format or length requirements, making it challenging to fully convey the research’s main points, findings, and conclusions.
• Accessibility: Research summaries may not be accessible to all readers, particularly those with limited literacy skills, visual impairments, or language barriers.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Project – Definition, Writing Guide and...

Survey Instruments – List and Their Uses

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and...

Table of Contents – Types, Formats, Examples

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

References in Research – Types, Examples and...

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

How To Write A Research Summary

It’s a common perception that writing a research summary is a quick and easy task. After all, how hard can jotting down 300 words be? But when you consider the weight those 300 words carry, writing a research summary as a part of your dissertation, essay or compelling draft for your paper instantly becomes daunting task.

A research summary requires you to synthesize a complex research paper into an informative, self-explanatory snapshot. It needs to portray what your article contains. Thus, writing it often comes at the end of the task list.

Regardless of when you’re planning to write, it is no less of a challenge, particularly if you’re doing it for the first time. This blog will take you through everything you need to know about research summary so that you have an easier time with it.

What is a Research Summary?

A research summary is the part of your research paper that describes its findings to the audience in a brief yet concise manner. A well-curated research summary represents you and your knowledge about the information written in the research paper.

While writing a quality research summary, you need to discover and identify the significant points in the research and condense it in a more straightforward form. A research summary is like a doorway that provides access to the structure of a research paper's sections.

Since the purpose of a summary is to give an overview of the topic, methodology, and conclusions employed in a paper, it requires an objective approach. No analysis or criticism.

Research summary or Abstract. What’s the Difference?

They’re both brief, concise, and give an overview of an aspect of the research paper. So, it’s easy to understand why many new researchers get the two confused. However, a research summary and abstract are two very different things with individual purpose. To start with, a research summary is written at the end while the abstract comes at the beginning of a research paper.

A research summary captures the essence of the paper at the end of your document. It focuses on your topic, methods, and findings. More like a TL;DR, if you will. An abstract, on the other hand, is a description of what your research paper is about. It tells your reader what your topic or hypothesis is, and sets a context around why you have embarked on your research.

Getting Started with a Research Summary

Before you start writing, you need to get insights into your research’s content, style, and organization. There are three fundamental areas of a research summary that you should focus on.

• While deciding the contents of your research summary, you must include a section on its importance as a whole, the techniques, and the tools that were used to formulate the conclusion. Additionally, there needs to be a short but thorough explanation of how the findings of the research paper have a significance.
• To keep the summary well-organized, try to cover the various sections of the research paper in separate paragraphs. Besides, how the idea of particular factual research came up first must be explained in a separate paragraph.
• As a general practice worldwide, research summaries are restricted to 300-400 words. However, if you have chosen a lengthy research paper, try not to exceed the word limit of 10% of the entire research paper.

How to Structure Your Research Summary

The research summary is nothing but a concise form of the entire research paper. Therefore, the structure of a summary stays the same as the paper. So, include all the section titles and write a little about them. The structural elements that a research summary must consist of are:

It represents the topic of the research. Try to phrase it so that it includes the key findings or conclusion of the task.

The abstract gives a context of the research paper. Unlike the abstract at the beginning of a paper, the abstract here, should be very short since you’ll be working with a limited word count.

Introduction

This is the most crucial section of a research summary as it helps readers get familiarized with the topic. You should include the definition of your topic, the current state of the investigation, and practical relevance in this part. Additionally, you should present the problem statement, investigative measures, and any hypothesis in this section.

Methodology

This section provides details about the methodology and the methods adopted to conduct the study. You should write a brief description of the surveys, sampling, type of experiments, statistical analysis, and the rationality behind choosing those particular methods.

Create a list of evidence obtained from the various experiments with a primary analysis, conclusions, and interpretations made upon that. In the paper research paper, you will find the results section as the most detailed and lengthy part. Therefore, you must pick up the key elements and wisely decide which elements are worth including and which are worth skipping.

This is where you present the interpretation of results in the context of their application. Discussion usually covers results, inferences, and theoretical models explaining the obtained values, key strengths, and limitations. All of these are vital elements that you must include in the summary.

Most research papers merge conclusion with discussions. However, depending upon the instructions, you may have to prepare this as a separate section in your research summary. Usually, conclusion revisits the hypothesis and provides the details about the validation or denial about the arguments made in the research paper, based upon how convincing the results were obtained.

The structure of a research summary closely resembles the anatomy of a scholarly article . Additionally, you should keep your research and references limited to authentic and  scholarly sources only.

Tips for Writing a Research Summary

The core concept behind undertaking a research summary is to present a simple and clear understanding of your research paper to the reader. The biggest hurdle while doing that is the number of words you have at your disposal. So, follow the steps below to write a research summary that sticks.

1. Read the parent paper thoroughly

You should go through the research paper thoroughly multiple times to ensure that you have a complete understanding of its contents. A 3-stage reading process helps.

a. Scan: In the first read, go through it to get an understanding of its basic concept and methodologies.

b. Read: For the second step, read the article attentively by going through each section, highlighting the key elements, and subsequently listing the topics that you will include in your research summary.

c. Skim: Flip through the article a few more times to study the interpretation of various experimental results, statistical analysis, and application in different contexts.

Sincerely go through different headings and subheadings as it will allow you to understand the underlying concept of each section. You can try reading the introduction and conclusion simultaneously to understand the motive of the task and how obtained results stay fit to the expected outcome.

2. Identify the key elements in different sections

While exploring different sections of an article, you can try finding answers to simple what, why, and how. Below are a few pointers to give you an idea:

• What is the research question and how is it addressed?
• Is there a hypothesis in the introductory part?
• What type of methods are being adopted?
• What is the sample size for data collection and how is it being analyzed?
• What are the most vital findings?
• Do the results support the hypothesis?

Discussion/Conclusion

• What is the final solution to the problem statement?
• What is the explanation for the obtained results?
• What is the drawn inference?
• What are the various limitations of the study?

3. Prepare the first draft

Now that you’ve listed the key points that the paper tries to demonstrate, you can start writing the summary following the standard structure of a research summary. Just make sure you’re not writing statements from the parent research paper verbatim.

Instead, try writing down each section in your own words. This will not only help in avoiding plagiarism but will also show your complete understanding of the subject. Alternatively, you can use a summarizing tool (AI-based summary generators) to shorten the content or summarize the content without disrupting the actual meaning of the article.

SciSpace Copilot is one such helpful feature! You can easily upload your research paper and ask Copilot to summarize it. You will get an AI-generated, condensed research summary. SciSpace Copilot also enables you to highlight text, clip math and tables, and ask any question relevant to the research paper; it will give you instant answers with deeper context of the article..

4. Include visuals

One of the best ways to summarize and consolidate a research paper is to provide visuals like graphs, charts, pie diagrams, etc.. Visuals make getting across the facts, the past trends, and the probabilistic figures around a concept much more engaging.

5. Double check for plagiarism

It can be very tempting to copy-paste a few statements or the entire paragraphs depending upon the clarity of those sections. But it’s best to stay away from the practice. Even paraphrasing should be done with utmost care and attention.

Also: QuillBot vs SciSpace: Choose the best AI-paraphrasing tool

6. Religiously follow the word count limit

You need to have strict control while writing different sections of a research summary. In many cases, it has been observed that the research summary and the parent research paper become the same length. If that happens, it can lead to discrediting of your efforts and research summary itself. Whatever the standard word limit has been imposed, you must observe that carefully.

7. Proofread your research summary multiple times

The process of writing the research summary can be exhausting and tiring. However, you shouldn’t allow this to become a reason to skip checking your academic writing several times for mistakes like misspellings, grammar, wordiness, and formatting issues. Proofread and edit until you think your research summary can stand out from the others, provided it is drafted perfectly on both technicality and comprehension parameters. You can also seek assistance from editing and proofreading services , and other free tools that help you keep these annoying grammatical errors at bay.

8. Watch while you write

Keep a keen observation of your writing style. You should use the words very precisely, and in any situation, it should not represent your personal opinions on the topic. You should write the entire research summary in utmost impersonal, precise, factually correct, and evidence-based writing.

9. Ask a friend/colleague to help

Once you are done with the final copy of your research summary, you must ask a friend or colleague to read it. You must test whether your friend or colleague could grasp everything without referring to the parent paper. This will help you in ensuring the clarity of the article.

Once you become familiar with the research paper summary concept and understand how to apply the tips discussed above in your current task, summarizing a research summary won’t be that challenging. While traversing the different stages of your academic career, you will face different scenarios where you may have to create several research summaries.

In such cases, you just need to look for answers to simple questions like “Why this study is necessary,” “what were the methods,” “who were the participants,” “what conclusions were drawn from the research,” and “how it is relevant to the wider world.” Once you find out the answers to these questions, you can easily create a good research summary following the standard structure and a precise writing style.

You might also like

Consensus GPT vs. SciSpace GPT: Choose the Best GPT for Research

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

Types of Essays in Academic Writing - Quick Guide (2024)

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case AskWhy Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Surveys Academic Research

Research Summary: What is it & how to write one

The Research Summary is used to report facts about a study clearly. You will almost certainly be required to prepare a research summary during your academic research or while on a research project for your organization.

If it is the first time you have to write one, the writing requirements may confuse you. The instructors generally assign someone to write a summary of the research work. Research summaries require the writer to have a thorough understanding of the issue.

This article will discuss the definition of a research summary and how to write one.

What is a research summary?

A research summary is a piece of writing that summarizes your research on a specific topic. Its primary goal is to offer the reader a detailed overview of the study with the key findings. A research summary generally contains the article’s structure in which it is written.

You must know the goal of your analysis before you launch a project. A research overview summarizes the detailed response and highlights particular issues raised in it. Writing it might be somewhat troublesome. To write a good overview, you want to start with a structure in mind. Read on for our guide.

Why is an analysis recap so important?

Your summary or analysis is going to tell readers everything about your research project. This is the critical piece that your stakeholders will read to identify your findings and valuable insights. Having a good and concise research summary that presents facts and comes with no research biases is the critical deliverable of any research project.

We’ve put together a cheat sheet to help you write a good research summary below.

Research Summary Guide

• Why was this research done?  – You want to give a clear description of why this research study was done. What hypothesis was being tested?
• Who was surveyed? – The what and why or your research decides who you’re going to interview/survey. Your research summary has a detailed note on who participated in the study and why they were selected. 
• What was the methodology? – Talk about the methodology. Did you do face-to-face interviews? Was it a short or long survey or a focus group setting? Your research methodology is key to the results you’re going to get. 
• What were the key findings? – This can be the most critical part of the process. What did we find out after testing the hypothesis? This section, like all others, should be just facts, facts facts. You’re not sharing how you feel about the findings. Keep it bias-free.
• Conclusion – What are the conclusions that were drawn from the findings. A good example of a conclusion. Surprisingly, most people interviewed did not watch the lunar eclipse in 2022, which is unexpected given that 100% of those interviewed knew about it before it happened.
• Takeaways and action points – This is where you bring in your suggestion. Given the data you now have from the research, what are the takeaways and action points? If you’re a researcher running this research project for your company, you’ll use this part to shed light on your recommended action plans for the business.

LEARN ABOUT:   Action Research

If you’re doing any research, you will write a summary, which will be the most viewed and more important part of the project. So keep a guideline in mind before you start. Focus on the content first and then worry about the length. Use the cheat sheet/checklist in this article to organize your summary, and that’s all you need to write a great research summary!

But once your summary is ready, where is it stored? Most teams have multiple documents in their google drives, and it’s a nightmare to find projects that were done in the past. Your research data should be democratized and easy to use.

We at QuestionPro launched a research repository for research teams, and our clients love it. All your data is in one place, and everything is searchable, including your research summaries! 

Authors: Prachi, Anas

MORE LIKE THIS

Experimental vs Observational Studies: Differences & Examples

Sep 5, 2024

Interactive Forms: Key Features, Benefits, Uses + Design Tips

Sep 4, 2024

Closed-Loop Management: The Key to Customer Centricity

Sep 3, 2024

Net Trust Score: Tool for Measuring Trust in Organization

Sep 2, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Tuesday CX Thoughts (TCXT)
• Uncategorized
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Verify originality of an essay

Get ideas for your paper

Cite sources with ease

Research Summary Structure, Samples, Writing Steps, and Useful Suggestions

Updated 28 Aug 2024

What is a Research Summary and Why Is It Important?

A research summary is a type of paper designed to provide a brief overview of a given study - typically, an article from a peer-reviewed academic journal. It is a frequent type of task encountered in US colleges and universities, both in humanitarian and exact sciences, which is due to how important it is to teach students to properly interact with and interpret scientific literature and in particular, academic papers, which are the key way through which new ideas, theories, and evidence are presented to experts in many fields of knowledge. A research summary typically preserves the structure/sections of the article it focuses on. Get the grades you want with our professional research paper helper .

How to Write a Research Summary – Typical Steps

Follow these clear steps to help avoid typical mistakes and productivity bottlenecks, allowing for a more efficient through your writing process:

• Skim the article in order to get a rough idea of the content covered in each section and to understand the relative importance of content, for instance, how important different lines of evidence are (this helps you understand which sections you should focus on more when reading in detail). Make sure you understand the task and your professor's requirements before reading the article. In this step, you can also decide whether to write a summary by yourself or ask for a cheap research paper writing service instead.
• Analyze and understand the topic and article. Writing a summary of a research paper involves becoming very familiar with the topic – sometimes, it is impossible to understand the content without learning about the current state of knowledge, as well as key definitions, concepts, models. This is often performed while reading the literature review. As for the paper itself, understanding it means understanding analysis questions, hypotheses, listed evidence, how strongly this evidence supports the hypotheses, as well as analysis implications. Keep in mind that only a deep understanding allows one to efficiently and accurately summarize the content.
• Make notes as you read. You could highlight or summarize each paragraph with a brief sentence that would record the key idea delivered in it (obviously, some paragraphs deserve more attention than others). However, be careful not to engage in extensive writing while still reading. This is important because, while reading, you might realize that some sections you initially considered important might actually be less important compared to information that follows. As for underlining or highlighting – do these only with the most important evidence, otherwise, there is little use in “coloring” everything without distinction.
• Assemble a draft by bringing together key evidence and notes from each paragraph/ section. Make sure that all elements characteristic of a research summary are covered (as detailed below).
• Find additional literature for forming or supporting your critical view (this is if your critical view/position is required), for instance, judgments about limitations of the study or contradictory evidence.

Read Also:  Criminal Justice Research Topics To Impress Your Teacher

Research Summary Structure

The research summary format resembles that found in the original paper (just a concise version of it). Content from all sections should be covered and reflected upon, regardless of whether corresponding headings are present or not. Key structural elements of any research summary are as follows:

• Title – it announces the exact topic/area of analysis and can even be formulated to briefly announce key finding(s) or argument(s) delivered.
• Abstract – this is a very concise and comprehensive description of the study, present virtually in any academic article (the length varies greatly, typically within 100-500 words). Unlike an academic article, your research summary is expected to have a much shorter abstract.
• Introduction – this is an essential part of any research summary which provides necessary context (the literature review) that helps introduce readers to the subject by presenting the current state of the investigation, an important concept or definition, etc. This section might also describe the subject’s importance (or might not, for instance, when it is self-evident). Finally, an introduction typically lists investigation questions and hypotheses advanced by authors, which are normally mentioned in detail in any research summary (obviously, doing this is only possible after identifying these elements in the original paper).
• Methodology – regardless of its location, this section details experimental methods or data analysis methods used (e.g. types of experiments, surveys, sampling, or statistical analysis). In a research summary, many of these details would have to be omitted; hence, it is important to understand what is most important to mention.
• Results section – this section lists in detail evidence obtained from all experiments with some primary data analysis, conclusions, observations, and primary interpretations being made. It is typically the largest section of any analysis paper, so, it has to be concisely rewritten, which implies understanding which content is worth omitting and worth keeping.
• Discussion – this is where results are being discussed in the context of current knowledge among experts. This section contains interpretations of results, theoretical models explaining the observed results, study strengths and especially limitations, complementary future exploration to be undertaken, conclusions, etc. All these are important elements that need to be conveyed in a summary.
• Conclusion – in the original article, this section could be absent or merged with “Discussion”. Specific research summary instructions might require this to be a standalone section. In a conclusion, hypotheses are revisited and validated or denied, based on how convincing the evidence is (key lines of evidence could be highlighted).
• References – this section is for mentioning those cited works directly in your summary – obviously, one has to provide appropriate citations at least for the original article (this often suffices). Mentioning other works might be relevant when your critical opinion is also required (supported with new unrelated evidence).

Note that if you need some model research summary papers done before you start writing yourself (this will help familiarize you with essay structure and various sections), you could simply recruit our company by following the link provided below.

Need more writing assistance?

Connect with our top writers and receive a research paper sample crafted to your needs.

Research Summary Writing Tips

Below is a checklist of useful research paper tips worth considering when writing research summaries:

• Make sure you are always aware of the bigger picture/ direction. You need to keep in mind a complete and coherent picture of the story delivered by the original article. It might be helpful to reread or scan it quickly to remind yourself of the declared goals, hypotheses, key evidence, and conclusions – this awareness offers a constant sense of direction, which ensures that no written sentence is out of context. It is useful doing this even after you have written a fourth, a third, or half of the paper (to make sure no deviation occurs).
• Consider writing a detailed research outline before writing the draft – it might be of great use when structuring your paper. A research summary template is also very likely to help you structure your paper.
• Sketch the main elements of the conclusion before writing it. Do this for a number of reasons: validate/invalidate hypotheses; enumerate key evidence supporting or invalidating them, list potential implications; mention the subject’s importance; mention study limitations and future directions for research. In order to include them all, it is useful having them written down and handy.
• Consider writing the introduction and discussion last. It makes sense to first list hypotheses, goals, questions, and key results. Latter, information contained in the introduction and discussion can be adapted as needed (for instance, to match a preset word count limit). Also, on the basis of already written paragraphs, you can easily generate your discussion with the help of a conclusion tool ; it works online and is absolutely free of charge. Apart from this, follow a natural order.
• Include visuals – you could summarize a lot of text using graphs or charts while simultaneously improving readability.
• Be very careful not to plagiarize. It is very tempting to “borrow” or quote entire phrases from an article, provided how well-written these are, but you need to summarize your paper without plagiarizing at all (forget entirely about copy-paste – it is only allowed to paraphrase and even this should be done carefully). The best way to stay safe is by formulating your own thoughts from scratch.
• Keep your word count in check. You don’t want your summary to be as long as the original paper (just reformulated). In addition, you might need to respect an imposed word count limit, which requires being careful about how much you write for each section.
• Proofread your work for grammar, spelling, wordiness, and formatting issues (feel free to use our convert case tool for titles, headings, subheadings, etc.).
• Watch your writing style – when summarizing content, it should be impersonal, precise, and purely evidence-based. A personal view/attitude should be provided only in the critical section (if required).
• Ask a colleague to read your summary and test whether he/she could understand everything without reading the article – this will help ensure that you haven’t skipped some important content, explanations, concepts, etc.

For additional information on formatting, structure, and for more writing tips, check out these research paper guidelines on our website. Remember that we cover most research papers writing services you can imagine and can offer help at various stages of your writing project, including proofreading, editing, rewriting for plagiarism elimination, and style adjustment.

Research Summary Example 1

Below are some defining elements of a sample research summary written from an imaginary article.

Title – “The probability of an unexpected volcanic eruption in Yellowstone” Introduction – this section would list those catastrophic consequences hitting our country in  case of a massive eruption and the importance of analyzing this matter. Hypothesis –  An eruption of the Yellowstone supervolcano would be preceded by intense precursory activity manifesting a few weeks up to a few years in advance. Results – these could contain a report of statistical data from multiple volcanic eruptions happening worldwide looking specifically at activity that preceded these events (in particular, how early each type of activity was detected). Discussion and conclusion – Given that Yellowstone is continuously monitored by scientists and that signs of an eruption are normally detected much in advance and at least a few days in advance, the hypothesis is confirmed. This could find application in creating emergency plans detailing an organized evacuation campaign and other response measures.

Research Summary Example 2

Below is another sample sketch, also from an imaginary article.

Title – “The frequency of extreme weather events in US in 2000-2008 as compared to the ‘50s” Introduction – Weather events bring immense material damage and cause human victims. Hypothesis – Extreme weather events are significantly more frequent nowadays than in the ‘50s Results – these could list the frequency of several categories of extreme events now and then: droughts and associated fires, massive rainfall/snowfall and associated floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, arctic cold waves, etc. Discussion and conclusion – Several types of extreme events indeed became significantly more frequent recently, confirming this hypothesis. This increasing frequency correlates reliably with rising CO2 levels in atmosphere and growing temperatures worldwide and in the absence of another recent major global change that could explain a higher frequency of disasters but also knowing how growing temperature disturbs weather patterns, it is natural to assume that global warming (CO2) causes this increase in frequency. This, in turn, suggests that this increased frequency of disasters is not a short-term phenomenon but is here to stay until we address CO2 levels.

Get professional fact-checking and editing!

Ensure accuracy and enhance quality in your papers. Our experts provide thorough fact-checking and editing for just $7/page.

Let Professionals Help With Your Research Summary

Writing a research summary has its challenges, but becoming familiar with its structure (i.e. the structure of an article), understanding well the article that needs to be summarized, and adhering to recommended guidelines will help the process go smoothly.

Simply create your account in a few clicks, place an order by uploading your instructions, and upload or indicate the article requiring a summary and choose a preferred writer for this task (according to experience, rating, bidding price). Our transparent system puts you in control, allowing you to set priorities as you wish (to our knowledge, few competitors have something equivalent in place). Obviously, we can help with many other essay types such as critical thinking essay, argumentative essay, etc. In particular, the research paper definition article on our website highlights a few popular paper types we work with.

Another unique advantage is that we allow and encourage you to communicate directly with your writer (if you wish) guiding his or her work – feel free to request partial drafts, to clarify potential issues you worry about, or even to revise papers as often as needed (for free) until you achieve a satisfactory result. We’ve implemented a system where money is released to writers only after students are fully satisfied with what they get. If you feel like giving it a try, it’s easy and worry-free! Just follow the link below.

ORDER RESEARCH PAPER

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback.

Written by Paul Calderon

As a trained writer and an expert in book publishing and finalization, Paul knows how to engage readers in his text. As an author himself, Paul never misses a chance to write. Writing is his true passion as he explores technology, education, and entertainment among many popular subjects these days. His mentoring experience and skills of creative guidance make his writing accessible, clear, and fun to follow.

Related Blog Posts

How to craft research objectives: guidelines & tips.

In the ever-evolving landscape of academic study, having clear and well-defined research objectives is crucial for the success of any work. Study a...

How to Write a Research Paper in APA and MLA Format

Properly formatting a research paper in APA or MLA style is essential for several reasons. First, it ensures that your work adheres to the academic...

What is qualitative research? Approaches, methods, and examples

Students in social sciences frequently seek to understand how people feel, think, and behave in specific situations or relationships that evolve ov...

Join our 150K of happy users

• Get original papers written according to your instructions
• Save time for what matters most

How to write a research summary

A research summary is a required task during academic research, and sometimes, you might need to prepare one during an organization's research project.

Most people find a research summary challenging. You must condense complex research material into an informative, easy-to-understand article, usually with a minimum of 300-500 words.

This blog article will guide you through all the steps required to make writing your research summary easier. 

What is a Research Summary?

A  research summary  is a concise overview of a research paper or project. It is designed to provide the reader with essential research insights without reading the entire document. Research summaries are commonly required in academic settings and are fundamental in disseminating knowledge concisely.

The key components of a Research Summary

Objective writing.

It is crucial to maintain objectivity when writing a research summary. The summary should reflect the author's ideas and findings without including personal opinions. This requires the summarizer to convey the main points and intent of the original research accurately while remaining neutral.

Focus and Clarity

Determining the focus of the summary is a critical first step. It involves deciding whether to create a "global" summary, which covers all main ideas, or a "selective" summary, which focuses on specific aspects of the research. The summary should be clear, engaging, and concise, capturing the essence of the study in a brief format.

Essential Elements

A good summary should include the research's foundation, the theoretical framework, and a clear outline of the empirical findings. It should also identify any research gaps addressed by the study. The content should be well-organized, starting with a brief introduction to the topic and then discussing the research methods, results, and conclusions.

Tips for writing a compelling Research Summary

Below is a checklist of helpful research paper tips worth considering when writing research summaries:

Considering the target audience 

The golden rule of writing is always to consider your target audience; a research summary is no exception. Why? Different people have different needs, and your paper should meet the needs and preferences of the target audience. Ask yourself, “Who am I writing for?” write down the answer, and you’ll find it easier to pinpoint research articles for the summary.

• Being aware of the bigger picture

Remembering a complete and coherent picture of the story delivered by the original article is crucial. It might be helpful to reread or scan the content to remind yourself of the declared goals, hypotheses, key evidence, and conclusions—this awareness offers a constant sense of direction, which ensures that no written sentence is out of context.

• Research outline

Consider writing a detailed research outline before writing a summary research draft. 

Sketch the main elements of the conclusion before writing it for several reasons:

• Validate/invalidate hypotheses.
• Enumerate key evidence supporting or invalidating them and list potential implications.
• Mention the subject's importance.
• Mention study limitations and future directions for research.

Consider writing the introduction and discussion last. It makes sense first to list hypotheses, goals, questions, and results. The information in the introduction and discussion can be adapted as needed (for instance, to match a word count limit). Additionally, based on written paragraphs, you can quickly generate your discussion with the help of a conclusion tool.

• Visual representation 

it’s not just about writing a long text and analysis of some subject by using the information you find, both research and its summary need visuals for full effect. Sometimes, a simple diagram or graph can say much of the information you tried to convey. A common mistake students make is leaving visuals for the original file and omitting them in the summary. Feel free to include tables, figures, and other visual supplements to this paper too.

• Avoiding plagiarism

It is very tempting to "borrow" or quote entire phrases from an article, provided how well-written these are. However, you need to summarize your paper without plagiarizing; only paraphrasing is allowed, and it's best to do it carefully. The best way to stay safe is by formulating your thoughts from scratch.

• Keeping the word count in check

The general rule of thumb is that the summary should meet the criteria of no more than 10% of the number of pages in the original document. In most cases, it takes 2 and 4 pages.

The writing style  

When summarizing content, it should be impersonal, precise, and purely evidence-based. A personal view or an attitude should be provided only in the critical section.

Ask a colleague to read your summary and test whether they can understand everything without reading the article—this will help ensure that you haven't skipped any vital content, explanations, concepts, etc.

• Using dedicated AI Tools

Leveraging tools like Wiseone can help by generating a thorough summary with key takeaways to remember, ensuring it remains concise and focused on the main ideas.

How to write a Research Summary

Once the requirements of the fundamentals for starting a research summary are satisfied, you can begin to write using the following format:

• Why was the research done?  – A clear description of why the research was embarked on and the hypothesis being tested.
• Who was surveyed?  – The research study should have details of the source of your information. If it was via a survey, you should document who the survey participants were and why they were selected.
• What was the methodology?  – Discuss the methodology regarding what kind of survey method you adopted. Was it a face-to-face interview, a phone interview, or a focus group setting?
• What were the key findings? - This is perhaps the most vital part of the process. What discoveries did you make after the testing? This part should be based on raw facts free from any personal bias.
• Conclusion: What conclusions were drawn from the findings?
• Takeaways and action points: This is where the views and perceptions can be reflected. Here, you can now share your recommendations or action points.
• Identify the article's focal point: To grasp the content covered in the research paper, you can skim the article first to understand the essential part of the research paper. 
• Analyze and understand the topic and article: Writing a research paper summary involves familiarizing yourself with the current state of knowledge, key definitions, concepts, and models. This information is often gleaned while reading the literature review. Please note that only a deep understanding ensures efficient and accurate content summarization.
• Make notes as you read:  Highlight and summarize each paragraph as you read. You would further condense your notes to create a draft forming your research summary.

How to Structure Your Research Summary

• Title  

The title announces the exact topic/area of analysis and can even be formulated to briefly announce key finding(s) or argument(s) delivered.

• Abstract  

An abstract is a concise and comprehensive description of the study, present virtually in any academic article (the length varies greatly, typically within 100-500 words). Unlike a scholarly article, your research summary is expected to have a much shorter abstract.

• Introduction  

The introduction is an essential part of any research summary, which provides the necessary context (the literature review) that helps introduce readers to the subject by presenting the current state of the investigation, an important concept or definition, etc. This section describes the subject's importance (or may not, for instance, when it is self-evident). Finally, an introduction typically lists investigation questions and hypotheses advanced by authors, which are usually mentioned in detail in any research summary (obviously, doing this is only possible after identifying these elements in the original paper).

• Methodology

Regardless of location, this section details experimental or data analysis methods (e.g., experiments, surveys, sampling, or statistical analysis). Many of these details would have to be omitted in a research summary; hence, it is essential to understand what is most important to mention.

• Results section –

This section lists evidence obtained from all experiments with some primary data analysis, conclusions, observations, and primary interpretations being made. It is typically the most significant section of any analysis paper, so it must be concisely rewritten, which implies understanding which content is worth omitting and keeping.

• Discussion  

The discussion is where experts discuss results in the context of current knowledge. This section contains interpretations of results, theoretical models explaining the observed results, study strengths and limitations, complementary future exploration, conclusions, etc. All these are essential elements that need to be conveyed in summary.

• Conclusion  

In the conclusion, hypotheses are revisited and validated or denied, based on how convincing the evidence is (key lines of evidence could be highlighted).

• References  

References mention those cited works directly in your summary – obviously, one has to provide appropriate citations, at least for the original article (this often suffices). Mentioning other works might be relevant when your critical opinion is also required (supported with new unrelated evidence).

Writing a practical research summary involves a blend of comprehension, objectivity, and clarity. Focusing on the main ideas, maintaining neutrality, and organizing the summary effectively can create a valuable and insightful overview that serves the audience's needs, whether for academic purposes or general knowledge.

What is a research summary?

What are the key components of a research summaries.

Objectivity : Maintaining objectivity is crucial when writing a research summary. The summary should reflect the author's ideas and findings without including personal opinions. This requires conveying the main points and intent of the original research accurately while remaining neutral.

Clarity and focus: Determining the focus of the summary is a critical first step. It involves the decision to create either a "global" summary, which covers all main ideas, or a "selective" summary, which focuses on specific aspects of the research. The summary should be clear, engaging, and concise, capturing the essence of the study in a brief format.

Essential elements: A good research summary should include the research's foundation, the theoretical framework, and a clear outline of the empirical findings. It should also identify any research gaps addressed by the study. The content should be well-organized, starting with a brief introduction to the topic and then discussing the research methods, results, and conclusions.

What are the tips for writing a compelling research summary?

• Thinking about the target audience 
• Keeping the writing style in check

What is the structure of a research summary?

• Introduction
• Results section

In the conclusion, hypotheses are revisited and validated or denied based on how convincing the evidence is (key lines of evidence could be highlighted).

Enhance your web search, Boost your reading productivity with Wiseone

Top AI tools for research in May 2024

13 simple & effective ways to gain knowledge, wiseone pro: your web search & reading copilot.

• How it works

Writing a Summary – Explanation & Examples

Published by Alvin Nicolas at October 17th, 2023 , Revised On October 17, 2023

In a world bombarded with vast amounts of information, condensing and presenting data in a digestible format becomes invaluable. Enter summaries. 

A summary is a brief and concise account of the main points of a larger body of work. It distils complex ideas, narratives, or data into a version that is quicker to read and easier to understand yet still retains the essence of the original content.

Importance of Summaries

The importance of summarising extends far beyond just making reading more manageable. In academic settings, summaries aid students in understanding and retaining complex materials, from textbook chapters to research articles. They also serve as tools to showcase one’s grasp of the subject in essays and reports. 

In professional arenas, summaries are pivotal in business reports, executive briefings, and even emails where key points need to be conveyed quickly to decision-makers. Meanwhile, summarising skills come into play in our personal lives when we relay news stories to friends, recap a movie plot, or even scroll through condensed news or app notifications on our smartphones.

Why Do We Write Summaries?

In our modern information age, the sheer volume of content available can be overwhelming. From detailed research papers to comprehensive news articles, the quest for knowledge is often met with lengthy and complex resources. This is where the power of a well-crafted summary comes into play. But what drives us to create or seek out summaries? Let’s discuss.

Makes Important Things Easy to Remember

At the heart of summarisation is the goal to understand. A well-written summary aids in digesting complex material. By distilling larger works into their core points, we reinforce the primary messages, making them easier to remember. This is especially crucial for students who need to retain knowledge for exams or professionals prepping for a meeting based on a lengthy report.

Simplification of Complex Topics

Not everyone is an expert in every field. Often, topics come laden with jargon, intricate details, and nuanced arguments. Summaries act as a bridge, translating this complexity into accessible and straightforward content. This is especially beneficial for individuals new to a topic or those who need just the highlights without the intricacies.

Aid in Researching and Understanding Diverse Sources

Researchers, writers, and academics often wade through many sources when working on a project. This involves finding sources of different types, such as primary or secondary sources , and then understanding their content. Sifting through each source in its entirety can be time-consuming. Summaries offer a streamlined way to understand each source’s main arguments or findings, making synthesising information from diverse materials more efficient.

Condensing Information for Presentation or Sharing

In professional settings, there is often a need to present findings, updates, or recommendations to stakeholders. An executive might not have the time to go through a 50-page report, but they would certainly appreciate a concise summary highlighting the key points. Similarly, in our personal lives, we often summarise movie plots, book stories, or news events when sharing with friends or family.

Characteristics of a Good Summary

Crafting an effective summary is an art. It’s more than just shortening a piece of content; it is about capturing the essence of the original work in a manner that is both accessible and true to its intent. Let’s explore the primary characteristics that distinguish a good summary from a mediocre one:

Conciseness

At the core of a summary is the concept of brevity. But being concise doesn’t mean leaving out vital information. A good summary will:

• Eliminate superfluous details or repetitive points.
• Focus on the primary arguments, events, or findings.
• Use succinct language without compromising the message.

Objectivity

Summarising is not about infusing personal opinions or interpretations. A quality summary will:

• Stick to the facts as presented in the original content.
• Avoid introducing personal biases or perspectives.
• Represent the original author’s intent faithfully.

A summary is meant to simplify and make content accessible. This is only possible if the summary itself is easy to understand. Ensuring clarity involves:

• Avoiding jargon or technical terms unless they are essential to the content. If they are used, they should be clearly defined.
• Structuring sentences in a straightforward manner.
• Making sure ideas are presented in a way that even someone unfamiliar with the topic can grasp the primary points.

A jumble of ideas, no matter how concise, will not make for a good summary. Coherence ensures that there’s a logical flow to the summarised content. A coherent summary will:

• Maintain a logical sequence, often following the structure of the original content.
• Use transition words or phrases to connect ideas and ensure smooth progression.
• Group related ideas together to provide structure and avoid confusion.

Steps of Writing a Summary

The process of creating a compelling summary is not merely about cutting down content. It involves understanding, discerning, and crafting. Here is a step-by-step guide to writing a summary that encapsulates the essence of the original work:

Reading Actively

Engage deeply with the content to ensure a thorough understanding.

• Read the entire document or work first to grasp its overall intent and structure.
• On the second read, underline or highlight the standout points or pivotal moments.
• Make brief notes in the margins or on a separate sheet, capturing the core ideas in your own words.

Identifying the Main Idea

Determine the backbone of the content, around which all other details revolve.

• Ask yourself: “What is the primary message or theme the author wants to convey?”
• This can often be found in the title, introduction, or conclusion of a piece.
• Frame the main idea in a clear and concise statement to guide your summary.

List Key Supporting Points

Understand the pillars that uphold the main idea, providing evidence or depth to the primary message.

• Refer back to the points you underlined or highlighted during your active reading.
• Note major arguments, evidence, or examples that the author uses to back up the main idea.
• Prioritise these points based on their significance to the main idea.

Draft the Summary

Convert your understanding into a condensed, coherent version of the original.

• Start with a statement of the main idea.
• Follow with the key supporting points, maintaining logical order.
• Avoid including trivial details or examples unless they’re crucial to the primary message.
• Use your own words, ensuring you are not plagiarising the original content.

Fine-tune your draft to ensure clarity, accuracy, and brevity.

• Read your draft aloud to check for flow and coherence.
• Ensure that your summary remains objective, avoiding any personal interpretations or biases.
• Check the length. See if any non-essential details can be removed without sacrificing understanding if it is too lengthy.
• Ensure clarity by ensuring the language is straightforward, and the main ideas are easily grasped.

The research done by our experts have:

• Precision and Clarity
• Zero Plagiarism
• Authentic Sources

Dos and Don’ts of Summarising Key Points

Summarising, while seemingly straightforward, comes with its nuances. Properly condensing content demands a balance between brevity and fidelity to the original work. To aid in crafting exemplary summaries, here is a guide on the essential dos and don’ts:

Use your Own Words

This ensures that you have truly understood the content and are not merely parroting it. It also prevents issues of plagiarism.

Tip: After reading the original content, take a moment to reflect on it. Then, without looking at the source, write down the main points in your own words.

Attribute Sources Properly

Giving credit is both ethical and provides context to readers, helping them trace back to the original work if needed. How to cite sources correctly is a skill every writer should master.

Tip: Use signal phrases like “According to [Author/Source]…” or “As [Author/Source] points out…” to seamlessly incorporate attributions.

Ensure Accuracy of the Summarised Content

A summary should be a reliable reflection of the original content. Distorting or misrepresenting the original ideas compromises the integrity of the summary.

Tip: After drafting your summary, cross-check with the original content to ensure all key points are represented accurately and ensure you are referencing credible sources .

Avoid Copy-Pasting Chunks of Original Content

This not only raises plagiarism concerns but also shows a lack of genuine engagement with the material.

Tip: If a particular phrase or sentence from the original is pivotal and cannot be reworded without losing its essence, use block quotes , quotation marks, and attribute the source.

Do not Inject your Personal Opinion

A summary should be an objective reflection of the source material. Introducing personal biases or interpretations can mislead readers.

Tip: Stick to the facts and arguments presented in the original content. If you find yourself writing “I think” or “In my opinion,” reevaluate the sentence.

Do not Omit Crucial Information

While a summary is meant to be concise, it shouldn’t be at the expense of vital details that are essential to understanding the original content’s core message.

Tip: Prioritise information. Always include the main idea and its primary supports. If you are unsure whether a detail is crucial, consider its impact on the overall message.

Examples of Summaries

Here are a few examples that will help you get a clearer view of how to write a summary. 

Example 1: Summary of a News Article

Original Article: The article reports on the recent discovery of a rare species of frog in the Amazon rainforest. The frog, named the “Emerald Whisperer” due to its unique green hue and the soft chirping sounds it makes, was found by a team of researchers from the University of Texas. The discovery is significant as it offers insights into the biodiversity of the region, and the Emerald Whisperer might also play a pivotal role in understanding the ecosystem balance.

Summary: Researchers from the University of Texas have discovered a unique frog, termed the “Emerald Whisperer,” in the Amazon rainforest. This finding sheds light on the region’s biodiversity and underscores the importance of the frog in ecological studies.

Example 2: Summary of a Research Paper

Original Paper: In a study titled “The Impact of Urbanisation on Bee Populations,” researchers conducted a year-long observation on bee colonies in three urban areas and three rural areas. Using specific metrics like colony health, bee productivity, and population size, the study found that urban environments saw a 30% decline in bee populations compared to rural settings. The research attributes this decline to factors like pollution, reduced green spaces, and increased temperatures in urban areas.

Summary: A study analysing the effects of urbanisation on bee colonies found a significant 30% decrease in bee populations in urban settings compared to rural areas. The decline is linked to urban factors such as pollution, diminished greenery, and elevated temperatures.

Example 3: Summary of a Novel

Original Story: In the novel “Winds of Fate,” protagonist Clara is trapped in a timeless city where memories dictate reality. Throughout her journey, she encounters characters from her past, present, and imagined future. Battling her own perceptions and a menacing shadow figure, Clara seeks an elusive gateway to return to her real world. In the climax, she confronts the shadow, which turns out to be her own fear, and upon overcoming it, she finds her way back, realising that reality is subjective.

Summary: “Winds of Fate” follows Clara’s adventures in a surreal city shaped by memories. Confronting figures from various phases of her life and battling a symbolic shadow of her own fear, Clara eventually discovers that reality’s perception is malleable and subjective.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is a summary.

A summary condenses a larger piece of content, capturing its main points and essence.  It is usually one-fourth of the original content.

What is a summary?

A summary is a concise representation of a larger text or content, highlighting its main ideas and points. It distils complex information into a shorter form, allowing readers to quickly grasp the essence of the original material without delving into extensive details. Summaries prioritise clarity, brevity, and accuracy.

When should I write a summary?

Write a summary when you need to condense lengthy content for easier comprehension and recall. It’s useful in academic settings, professional reports, presentations, and research to highlight key points. Summaries aid in comparing multiple sources, preparing for discussions, and sharing essential details of extensive materials efficiently with others.

How can I summarise a source without plagiarising?

To summarise without plagiarising: Read the source thoroughly, understand its main ideas, and then write the summary in your own words. Avoid copying phrases verbatim. Attribute the source properly. Use paraphrasing techniques and cross-check your summary against the original to ensure distinctiveness while retaining accuracy. Always prioritise understanding over direct replication.

What is the difference between a summary and an abstract?

A summary condenses a text, capturing its main points from various content types like books, articles, or movies. An abstract, typically found in research papers and scientific articles, provides a brief overview of the study’s purpose, methodology, results, and conclusions. Both offer concise versions, but abstracts are more structured and specific.

You May Also Like

When researching or exploring a new topic, the distinction between primary and secondary sources is paramount. The validity, reliability, and relevance of the information you gather will heavily depend on the type of source you consult. 

A tertiary source is an information source that compiles, analyses, and synthesises both primary and secondary sources.

Primary sources refer to original, unmediated documents or records that have not been altered or transformed by interpretation or commentary. They provide first-hand accounts, evidence, or direct testimony concerning a subject or event under investigation.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

• Research Summary: What Is It & How To Write One

Introduction

A research summary is a requirement during academic research and sometimes you might need to prepare a research summary during a research project for an organization.

Most people find a research summary a daunting task as you are required to condense complex research material into an informative, easy-to-understand article most times with a minimum of 300-500 words.

In this post, we will guide you through all the steps required to make writing your research summary an easier task. 

What is a Research Summary?

A research summary is a piece of writing that summarizes the research of a specific topic into bite-size easy-to-read and comprehend articles. The primary goal is to give the reader a detailed outline of the key findings of a research.

It is an unavoidable requirement in colleges and universities. To write a good research summary, you must understand the goal of your research, as this would help make the process easier. 

A research summary preserves the structure and sections of the article it is derived from.

Research Summary or Abstract: What’s The Difference?

The Research Summary and Abstract are similar, especially as they are both brief, straight to the point, and provide an overview of the entire research paper. However, there are very clear differences.

To begin with, a Research summary is written at the end of a research activity, while the Abstract is written at the beginning of a research paper. 

A Research Summary captures the main points of a study, with an emphasis on the topic, method , and discoveries, an Abstract is a description of what your research paper would talk about and the reason for your research or the hypothesis you are trying to validate.

Let us take a deeper look at the difference between both terms.

What is an Abstract?

An abstract is a short version of a research paper. It is written to convey the findings of the research to the reader. It provides the reader with information that would help them understand the research, by giving them a clear idea about the subject matter of a research paper. It is usually submitted before the presentation of a research paper.

What is a Summary?

A summary is a short form of an essay, a research paper, or a chapter in a book. A research summary is a narration of a research study, condensing the focal points of research to a shorter form, usually aligned with the same structure of the research study, from which the summary is derived.

What Is The Difference Between an Abstract and a Summary?

An abstract communicates the main points of a research paper, it includes the questions, major findings, the importance of the findings, etc.

An abstract reflects the perceptions of the author about a topic, while a research summary reflects the ideology of the research study that is being summarized.

Getting Started with a Research Summary

Before commencing a research summary, there is a need to understand the style and organization of the content you plan to summarize. There are three fundamental areas of the research that should be the focal point:

• When deciding on the content include a section that speaks to the importance of the research, and the techniques and tools used to arrive at your conclusion.
• Keep the summary well organized, and use paragraphs to discuss the various sections of the research.
• Restrict your research to 300-400 words which is the standard practice for research summaries globally. However, if the research paper you want to summarize is a lengthy one, do not exceed 10% of the entire research material.

Once you have satisfied the requirements of the fundamentals for starting your research summary, you can now begin to write using the following format:

• Why was this research done?   – A clear description of the reason the research was embarked on and the hypothesis being tested.
• Who was surveyed? – Your research study should have details of the source of your information. If it was via a survey, you should document who the participants of the survey were and the reason that they were selected.
• What was the methodology? – Discuss the methodology, in terms of what kind of survey method did you adopt. Was it a face-to-face interview, a phone interview, or a focus group setting?
• What were the key findings? – This is perhaps the most vital part of the process. What discoveries did you make after the testing? This part should be based on raw facts free from any personal bias.
• Conclusion – What conclusions did you draw from the findings?
• Takeaways and action points – This is where your views and perception can be reflected. Here, you can now share your recommendations or action points.
• Identify the focal point of the article –  In other to get a grasp of the content covered in the research paper, you can skim the article first, in a bid to understand the most essential part of the research paper. 
• Analyze and understand the topic and article – Writing a summary of a research paper involves being familiar with the topic –  the current state of knowledge, key definitions, concepts, and models. This is often gleaned while reading the literature review. Please note that only a deep understanding ensures efficient and accurate summarization of the content.
• Make notes as you read – Highlight and summarize each paragraph as you read. Your notes are what you would further condense to create a draft that would form your research summary.

How to Structure Your Research Summary

• Title – This highlights the area of analysis, and can be formulated to briefly highlight key findings.
• Abstract – this is a very brief and comprehensive description of the study, required in every academic article, with a length of 100-500 words at most. 
• Introduction – this is a vital part of any research summary, it provides the context and the literature review that gently introduces readers to the subject matter. The introduction usually covers definitions, questions, and hypotheses of the research study. 
• Methodology –This section emphasizes the process and or data analysis methods used, in terms of experiments, surveys, sampling, or statistical analysis. 
• Results section – this section lists in detail the results derived from the research with evidence obtained from all the experiments conducted.
• Discussion – these parts discuss the results within the context of current knowledge among subject matter experts. Interpretation of results and theoretical models explaining the observed results, the strengths of the study, and the limitations experienced are going to be a part of the discussion. 
• Conclusion – In a conclusion, hypotheses are discussed and revalidated or denied, based on how convincing the evidence is.
• References – this section is for giving credit to those who work you studied to create your summary. You do this by providing appropriate citations as you write.

Research Summary Example 1

Below are some defining elements of a sample research summary.

Title – “The probability of an unexpected volcanic eruption in Greenwich”

Introduction – this section would list the catastrophic consequences that occurred in the country and the importance of analyzing this event. 

Hypothesis –  An eruption of the Greenwich supervolcano would be preceded by intense preliminary activity manifesting in advance, before the eruption.

Results – these could contain a report of statistical data from various volcanic eruptions happening globally while looking critically at the activity that occurred before these events. 

Discussion and conclusion – Given that Greenwich is now consistently monitored by scientists and that signs of an eruption are usually detected before the volcanic eruption, this confirms the hypothesis. Hence creating an emergency plan outlining other intervention measures and ultimately evacuation is essential. 

Research Summary Example 2

Below is another sample sketch.

Title – “The frequency of extreme weather events in the UK in 2000-2008 as compared to the ‘60s”

Introduction – Weather events bring intense material damage and cause pain to the victims affected.

Hypothesis – Extreme weather events are more frequent in recent times compared to the ‘50s

Results – The frequency of several categories of extreme events now and then are listed here, such as droughts, fires, massive rainfall/snowfalls, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc.

Discussion and conclusion – Several types of extreme events have become more commonplace in recent times, confirming the hypothesis. This rise in extreme weather events can be traced to rising CO2 levels and increasing temperatures and global warming explain the rising frequency of these disasters. Addressing the rising CO2 levels and paying attention to climate change is the only to combat this phenomenon.

A research summary is the short form of a research paper, analyzing the important aspect of the study. Everyone who reads a research summary has a full grasp of the main idea being discussed in the original research paper. Conducting any research means you will write a summary, which is an important part of your project and would be the most read part of your project.

Having a guideline before you start helps, this would form your checklist which would guide your actions as you write your research summary. It is important to note that a Research Summary is different from an Abstract paper written at the beginning of a research paper, describing the idea behind a research paper.

Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!

• abstract in research papers
• abstract writing
• action research
• research summary
• research summary vs abstract
• research surveys
• Angela Kayode-Sanni

You may also like:

How to Write An Abstract For Research Papers: Tips & Examples

In this article, we will share some tips for writing an effective abstract, plus samples you can learn from.

Research Questions: Definitions, Types + [Examples]

A comprehensive guide on the definition of research questions, types, importance, good and bad research question examples

Action Research: What it is, Stages & Examples

Introduction Action research is an evidence-based approach that has been used for years in the field of education and social sciences....

The McNamara Fallacy: How Researchers Can Detect and to Avoid it.

Introduction The McNamara Fallacy is a common problem in research. It happens when researchers take a single piece of data as evidence...

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..

What is a Summary? An In-depth Guide on Definition, Types, and Examples

Understanding what a summary contains is fundamental to academic success. It represents a concise restatement of an argument, paper, or lecture's main points, facilitating better understanding, and the ability to highlight connections between concepts.

The term 'summary' itself, alongside variations such as 'overview' and 'review', plays a critical role in both written and oral academic communication, proving indispensable for those seeking to grasp and convey key ideas efficiently.

This article aims to break down in detail, the definition of a summary, including what a summary looks like and its essential elements, and delving into the various types of summaries. It will also provide a detailed look at the summary structure, summary format, and the components and steps crucial in crafting an effective summary, complemented by practical summary writing examples.

Through understanding the nuances of summary design and identifying common pitfalls, readers will gain insights into optimizing their summary writing skills for academic and professional success.

What is a Summary?

Summary is a distilled rendition of content that encapsulates a broad understanding of a subject matter. This condensation is aimed at being concise, accurate, and readily comprehensible. 

Purpose and Structure of a Summary

• The primary aim of a summary is to conserve the reader's time and effort, offering a pathway to grasp the key themes of more extensive work in a format that is both accessible and manageable. A typical summary structure encompasses an introduction, body, and conclusion, with the introduction specifying the title of the original work, its author, and the main topic. Importantly, a summary should avoid personal opinions or interpretations, and represent the ideas and arguments of the original work. This objective stance ensures that the summary remains a true reflection of the source material, devoid of subjective bias.

The term ‘summary’ can be used both as a noun as well as an adjective. Let’s see how

• As a Noun : A summary is characterized by its ability to offer a short, clear exposition that conveys the principal facts or ideas about a topic. This encapsulation is a comprehensive and brief abstract, spotlighting previously stated facts or statements. The essence of summarizing lies in its capacity to distill a larger body of work into its main points and essential details, presenting them in a succinct format. Synonyms of summary include abstract, breviary, and epitome, among others, each underscoring the brevity and comprehensiveness of the summary.
• As an Adjective : The term 'summary' is also used as an adjective, denoting actions carried out swiftly, often bypassing the conventional process or discussion. This usage highlights the efficiency and directness of summary actions, especially in contexts requiring prompt decision-making or succinct communication. Synonyms for this usage include direct, prompt, etc,

Types of Summaries

Summaries play a crucial role across various domains, serving to condense and clarify content for different purposes. Here, we explore the diverse types of summaries, each tailored to specific needs and contexts:

• Academic Summaries: Utilized in scholarly writing, these summaries distill complex information into digestible parts, aiding in the comprehension of intricate ideas and arguments.
• Meeting Summaries: Essential for both attendees and absentees, they encapsulate discussions, decisions, and subsequent steps, ensuring alignment and shared understanding.
• Medical Summaries: Offer a comprehensive view of a patient's health status, treatments, and prognosis, valuable for healthcare providers, patients, and families alike.
• Business Document Overviews: Summarize key elements of documents like business plans or annual reports, providing a high-level perspective.
• Book Summaries: Found on back covers or online, they give potential readers insight into themes, characters, and plot, aiding in decision-making without revealing too much.
• Product Summaries: Highlight features, benefits, and uses of products, assisting customers in making informed purchasing decisions.
• News Summaries (Abstracts): Allow readers to grasp the main points of news stories quickly, saving time and effort by avoiding full-article reads.
• Abstracts and Synopses: Serve as concise presentations of long texts or articles, helping readers decide on engaging with the full material. Abstracts highlight major points, while synopses chronologically offer brief overviews of content.
• Literary and Film Reviews: These summaries not only recount the narrative but also include evaluations of the significance and impact of the work, often incorporating the reviewer's insights.
• Policy and Research Summaries: Analyze and evaluate content, focusing on the implications and usefulness of the findings for policy development and professional learning.

Components of a Good Summary

Creating an effective summary requires adherence to certain foundational components that ensure clarity, relevance, and coherence. These components are critical in encapsulating the essence of the original text while making it accessible and informative for the reader. Below are the key components and steps involved in crafting a good summary:

• Main Idea or Thesis: The summary must clearly identify the central theme or thesis of the original work. This serves as the anchor around which the summary is structured.
• Essential Supporting Points: It should include all crucial arguments or points that support the main idea, ensuring the reader grasps the full scope of the original work without needing to refer to it.
• Structure and Coherence: Present the author's points in a logical order, starting with the thesis or main idea and following with supporting details. This structure aids in the reader's comprehension.
• Comprehensiveness and Conciseness: While being comprehensive enough to cover the original work's significant points, a summary should also be concise, avoiding unnecessary details or digressions.
• Objective Representation: Maintain an objective tone, refraining from including personal opinions or biases. The goal is to reflect the original text's content and tone accurately.

Summary Design and Structure

Designing and structuring a summary requires a meticulous approach to ensure that the essence of the original text is captured accurately and concisely. The following outlines the key steps and considerations for crafting an effective summary:

• Start with an introductory sentence that includes the text's title , author , and the main point . This sets a clear context for the reader.
• Example : "In 'The Art of War' by Sun Tzu, the primary focus is on strategies for military success."
• Summaries must be written in your own words , reflecting only the ideas of the original text to maintain authenticity.
• Identify and list the significant sub-claims used by the author to support the main point. This helps in understanding the structure of the original argument or narrative.
• Select three supporting passages from the text, quoting them word-for-word for accuracy. Cite each passage clearly by mentioning the work, author, and paragraph number.
• Example of citation : "(Tzu, 'The Art of War', para. 5)."
• Utilize diagrams or mind maps for complex summaries, such as story summaries or film analyses. This visual representation can significantly aid in understanding themes, character developments, or critical events.
• The Little Prince Story Summary : A mind map illustrating the story's theme, characteristics of the little prince, and his travel experiences.
• Skyfall 007 Story Summary : A production-focused diagram categorizing every element and deliverable for the movie.
• Sleeping Beauty Story Summary : A diagram highlighting key events of the princess's story, with each event labeled and color-coded for clarity.
• Present the author’s points in a straightforward structure , starting with the thesis or main idea, followed by supporting points. This logical progression aids in reader comprehension.
• The summary overview structure should be clear and distinct , employing bullet points or headings to group similar information, enhancing readability.
• Aim for comprehensiveness and conciseness ; distill complex information into its essence while maintaining clarity and brevity.

By adhering to these guidelines, the summary design and structure will not only accurately reflect the original text but also provide a clear, concise, and engaging overview for the reader. Visual aids, when appropriate, can further enhance understanding, making the summary more accessible and informative.

Step-by-Step Process for Crafting a Summary

To craft a concise and informative summary, especially of a research paper, the following step-by-step process is essential. This structured approach ensures clarity, accuracy, and relevance, aligning with the objective of summarizing:

• Read the Entire Paper : Focus on understanding the main points, findings, and the authors' conclusions. Pay special attention to the introduction, results, and discussion sections to grasp the study's significance and potential usefulness.
• Abstract and Conclusion : Use these sections to build a foundational understanding of the research paper's goals and outcomes. Write a simplified version of both, highlighting the key points and findings.
• Methods Section : Review this part only if it's necessary to comprehend the data interpretation, ensuring a complete understanding of the research conducted.
• Sectional Analysis : Divide the text into sections to better understand its structure and main arguments, which are crucial for a comprehensive summary.
• Key Point Extraction : Make a list of the most important points, distinguishing between main ideas and supporting details. Assign a keyword to each identified point to organize and streamline the summary writing process.
• Writing in Your Own Words : Using your own words, present the material from the author's perspective, ensuring an objective representation of the original text. Begin with an introduction that includes the text's title, author, and main point.
• Accuracy and Completeness Check : Compare the summary against the original article to ensure all critical information is accurately and fully represented. This step is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the original work.
• Revision and Editing : Revise the summary for clarity, coherence, and conciseness. This includes checking for grammatical and spelling errors, verifying the summary's length, and potentially having someone else review the work. Additionally, ensure proper citation methods are used to avoid plagiarism.

By following these steps, the summary writing process becomes a methodical exercise in distilling complex information into a digestible format. This approach not only aids in understanding but also in effectively communicating the essence of the original work to the intended audience.

Examples of Summary Usage

To illustrate the concepts discussed, examples of both full and concise article summaries are provided:

• Macbeth : A comprehensive summary of Shakespeare's "Macbeth" would encapsulate the tragic downfall of Macbeth from a noble thane to a tyrannical ruler, driven by prophesies and manipulation. It would detail key events, such as the prophecy of the witches, the murder of King Duncan, and Macbeth's eventual demise, highlighting themes of ambition, guilt, and fate.
• The Lottery Rose : This summary would outline the story of a young boy, abused and neglected, who finds solace and hope through a small rose bush he wins at a supermarket lottery. It would touch upon themes of abuse, redemption, and the power of kindness.
• My Sister's Keeper : A brief summary might focus on the central ethical dilemma of a girl conceived to save her sister's life, exploring themes of medical ethics, family dynamics, and personal autonomy.

In professional contexts, summaries provide clear overviews of meetings, judicial decisions, and project progress:

• Meeting Summary : Offers a clear overview of decisions made, ensuring all participants, including absentees, are informed of the outcomes and action items.
• Judicial Summary : An example includes the judge exercising summary jurisdiction to swiftly resolve a dispute, demonstrating the use of summaries in legal settings for efficiency.
• Project Progress Summary : For instance, a summary detailing the progress in building a bridge would provide stakeholders with a quick, comprehensive update on milestones achieved and challenges faced.

Finally, summaries also play a pivotal role in advocating for systemic changes or summarizing large-scale projects or reports:

• Advocacy for Public Healthcare System : A concise statement summarizing the need for a better public healthcare system can effectively communicate the core argument to a broad audience.
• Chapter/Plot Summary : Essential in academic settings, these summaries help students and researchers quickly grasp the main points and themes of a specific chapter or the overall plot of a book.

Common Challenges in Summary Writing

In the process of summary writing, several common pitfalls can significantly affect the clarity, accuracy, and effectiveness of the final product. Recognizing and avoiding these pitfalls is crucial for crafting a concise and informative summary.

• Including irrelevant information can distract from the main ideas, making the summary less effective.
• Writing a summary that is too long or too short disrupts the balance between comprehensiveness and conciseness, leading to an ineffective summary.
• Being too generic limits the summary's relevance, while being overly specific can reduce its broader applicability.
• Failing to convey the original text's tone and purpose can lead to misinterpretation, affecting the summary's accuracy.
• Being too passive or boastful can undermine the summary's credibility, while being too boring or flashy can impact its engagement level.
• A summary that is overly personal or impersonal may struggle with relatability, affecting its impact on the reader.
• Not capturing the main ideas or focusing excessively on plot details can result in a summary with limited depth and analysis.
• The lack of textual evidence to support arguments weakens the summary's analysis and credibility.
• Overreliance on secondary sources can diminish the summary's originality and analytical depth.
• Ignoring the historical or cultural context of a work can restrict its interpretation and understanding.
• Restating information instead of summarizing leads to redundancy and a lack of clarity.
• Failing to proofread can lead to errors in spelling, grammar, and clarity, diminishing the summary's quality.
• Using overly complex language makes the summary difficult to understand and interpret.

What is a summary and could you provide an example?

A summary is a concise recapitulation of the primary points, typically serving as a conclusion to a piece of work. For instance, a chapter summary would distill the essential arguments and conclusions. Meanwhile, a brief is a comprehensive framework, with main points and subpoints, for a discourse that is often legal in nature, such as a brief prepared for a legal argument.

What are the different types of summaries that exist?

There are several main types of summaries, including:

• Educational Summary
• Professional Summary
• Consumer Oriented Summary
• Thematic Summary
• Critical Summary
• Descriptive Summary
• Synoptic Summary (or Synthesis)

Could you explain how to craft a thorough summary?

To write a detailed summary, you should:

• Immediately report the overall topic.
• Start with the title of the essay and the author's name.
• Use the present tense.
• Outline the primary points addressed in the text.
• If necessary, include relevant supporting details based on the desired length and depth of the summary.
• Note any significant conclusions that have been drawn.

What is the proper format for writing a summary?

When writing a summary, you should adhere to the following guidelines:

• Write the summary in your own words.
• Ensure the summary only reflects the ideas from the original text.
• Avoid including your personal opinions, interpretations, deductions, or comments.
• Identify the author's significant sub-claims in the order they use to support the main point.

Sign up for more like this.

How to Write a Research Paper Summary

One of the most important skills you can imbibe as an academician is to know how to summarize a research paper. During your academic journey, you may need to write a summary of findings in research quite often and for varied reasons – be it to write an introduction for a peer-reviewed publication , to submit a critical review, or to simply create a useful database for future referencing.

It can be quite challenging to effectively write a research paper summary for often complex work, which is where a pre-determined workflow can help you optimize the process. Investing time in developing this skill can also help you improve your scientific acumen, increasing your efficiency and productivity at work. This article illustrates some useful advice on how to write a research summary effectively. But, what is research summary in the first place?  

A research paper summary is a crisp, comprehensive overview of a research paper, which encapsulates the purpose, findings, methods, conclusions, and relevance of a study. A well-written research paper summary is an indicator of how well you have understood the author’s work. 

Table of Contents

Draft a research paper summary in minutes with paperpal. click here to start writing.

• 2. Invest enough time to understand the topic deeply 

Use Paperpal to summarize your research paper. Click here to get started!

• Mistakes to avoid while writing your research paper summary 

Let Paperpal do the heavy lifting. Click here to start writing your summary now!

Frequently asked questions (faq), how to write a research paper summary.

Writing a good research paper summary comes with practice and skill. Here is some useful advice on how to write a research paper summary effectively.  

1. Determine the focus of your summary

Before you begin to write a summary of research papers, determine the aim of your research paper summary. This will give you more clarity on how to summarize a research paper, including what to highlight and where to find the information you need, which accelerates the entire process. If you are aiming for the summary to be a supporting document or a proof of principle for your current research findings, then you can look for elements that are relevant to your work.

On the other hand, if your research summary is intended to be a critical review of the research article, you may need to use a completely different lens while reading the paper and conduct your own research regarding the accuracy of the data presented. Then again, if the research summary is intended to be a source of information for future referencing, you will likely have a different approach. This makes determining the focus of your summary a key step in the process of writing an effective research paper summary. 

2. Invest enough time to understand the topic deeply

In order to author an effective research paper summary, you need to dive into the topic of the research article. Begin by doing a quick scan for relevant information under each section of the paper. The abstract is a great starting point as it helps you to quickly identify the top highlights of the research article, speeding up the process of understanding the key findings in the paper. Be sure to do a careful read of the research paper, preparing notes that describe each section in your own words to put together a summary of research example or a first draft. This will save your time and energy in revisiting the paper to confirm relevant details and ease the entire process of writing a research paper summary.

When reading papers, be sure to acknowledge and ignore any pre-conceived notions that you might have regarding the research topic. This will not only help you understand the topic better but will also help you develop a more balanced perspective, ensuring that your research paper summary is devoid of any personal opinions or biases. 

3. Keep the summary crisp, brief and engaging

A research paper summary is usually intended to highlight and explain the key points of any study, saving the time required to read through the entire article. Thus, your primary goal while compiling the summary should be to keep it as brief, crisp and readable as possible. Usually, a short introduction followed by 1-2 paragraphs is adequate for an effective research article summary. Avoid going into too much technical detail while describing the main results and conclusions of the study. Rather focus on connecting the main findings of the study to the hypothesis , which can make the summary more engaging. For example, instead of simply reporting an original finding – “the graph showed a decrease in the mortality rates…”, you can say, “there was a decline in the number of deaths, as predicted by the authors while beginning the study…” or “there was a decline in the number of deaths, which came as a surprise to the authors as this was completely unexpected…”.

Unless you are writing a critical review of the research article, the language used in your research paper summaries should revolve around reporting the findings, not assessing them. On the other hand, if you intend to submit your summary as a critical review, make sure to provide sufficient external evidence to support your final analysis. Invest sufficient time in editing and proofreading your research paper summary thoroughly to ensure you’ve captured the findings accurately. You can also get an external opinion on the preliminary draft of the research paper summary from colleagues or peers who have not worked on the research topic. 

Mistakes to avoid while writing your research paper summary

Now that you’ve understood how to summarize a research paper, watch out for these red flags while writing your summary. 

• Not paying attention to the word limit and recommended format, especially while submitting a critical review 
• Evaluating the findings instead of maintaining an objective , unbiased view while reading the research paper 
• Skipping the essential editing step , which can help eliminate avoidable errors and ensure that the language does not misrepresent the findings 
• Plagiarism, it is critical to write in your own words or paraphrase appropriately when reporting the findings in your scientific article summary 

We hope the recommendations listed above will help answer the question of how to summarize a research paper and enable you to tackle the process effectively. 

Summarize your research paper with Paperpal

Paperpal, an AI academic writing assistant, is designed to support academics at every step of the academic writing process. Built on over two decades of experience helping researchers get published and trained on millions of published research articles, Paperpal offers human precision at machine speed. Paperpal Copilot, with advanced generative AI features, can help academics achieve 2x the writing in half the time, while transforming how they research and write.

How to summarize a research paper with Paperpal?

To generate your research paper summary, simply login to the platform and use the Paperpal Copilot Summary feature to create a flawless summary of your work. Here’s a step-by-step process to help you craft a summary in minutes:

• Paste relevant research articles to be summarized into Paperpal; the AI will scan each section and extract key information.
• In minutes, Paperpal will generate a comprehensive summary that showcases the main paper highlights while adhering to academic writing conventions.
• Check the content to polish and refine the language, ensure your own voice, and add citations or references as needed.

The abstract and research paper summary serve similar purposes but differ in scope, length, and placement. The abstract is a concise yet detailed overview of the research, placed at the beginning of a paper, with the aim of providing readers with a quick understanding of the paper’s content and to help them decide whether to read the full article. Usually limited to a few hundred words, it highlights the main objectives, methods, results, and conclusions of the study. On the other hand, a research paper summary provides a crisp account of the entire research paper. Its purpose is to provide a brief recap for readers who may want to quickly grasp the main points of the research without reading the entire paper in detail.

The structure of a research summary can vary depending on the specific requirements or guidelines provided by the target publication or institution. A typical research summary includes the following key sections: introduction (including the research question or objective), methodology (briefly describing the research design and methods), results (summarizing the key findings), discussion (highlighting the implications and significance of the findings), and conclusion (providing a summary of the main points and potential future directions).

The summary of a research paper is important because it provides a condensed overview of the study’s purpose, methods, results, and conclusions. It allows you to quickly grasp the main points and relevance of the research without having to read the entire paper. Research summaries can also be an invaluable way to communicate research findings to a broader audience, such as policymakers or the general public.

  When writing a research paper summary, it is crucial to avoid plagiarism by properly attributing the original authors’ work. To learn how to summarize a research paper while avoiding plagiarism, follow these critical guidelines: (1) Read the paper thoroughly to understand the main points and key findings. (2) Use your own words and sentence structures to restate the information, ensuring that the research paper summary reflects your understanding of the paper. (3) Clearly indicate when you are paraphrasing or quoting directly from the original paper by using appropriate citation styles. (4) Cite the original source for any specific ideas, concepts, or data that you include in your summary. (5) Review your summary to ensure it accurately represents the research paper while giving credit to the original authors.

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• 5 Reasons for Rejection After Peer Review
• Ethical Research Practices For Research with Human Subjects
• How to Write a Conclusion for Research Papers (with Examples)
• Publish or Perish – Understanding the Importance of Scholarly Publications in Academia

PhD Dissertation Outline: Creating a Roadmap to Success

How ai can improve the academic writing experience, you may also like, how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write an abstract in research papers..., how to write dissertation acknowledgements, how to write a high-quality conference paper, measuring academic success: definition & strategies for excellence, is it ethical to use ai-generated abstracts without..., what are journal guidelines on using generative ai..., should you use ai tools like chatgpt for..., 9 steps to publish a research paper, how to make translating academic papers less challenging.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to enjoy a better experience.

A Complete Guide to Writing a Research Summary

A summary is a key part of any research. So, how should you go about writing one?

You will find many guides on the Internet about writing research. But, any article seldom covers the prospect of writing a research summary. While many things are shortened versions of the original article, there’s much more to research summaries.

From descriptive statistics to writing scientific research, a summary plays a vital role in describing the key ideas within. So, it begs a few questions, such as:

• What exactly is a research summary?
• How do you write one?
• What are some of the tips for writing a good research summary ?

In this guide, we’ll answer all of these questions and explore a few essential factors about research writing. So, let’s jump right into it.

What is a Research Summary?

A research summary is a short, concise summary of an academic research paper. It is often used to summarize the results of an experiment, summarize the major findings and conclusions, and provide a brief overview of the methods and procedures used in the study.

The purpose of a research summary is to provide readers with enough information about an article to decide whether they want to read it in its entirety. It should be no more than two paragraphs long and should include:

• A brief introduction summarizing why the article was written
• The main idea of the article
• The major findings and conclusions
• An overview of how the study was conducted

In order to write effective research summaries, it is important that you can capture the essential points of the research and provide a concise overview. The key step in writing a good summary is to read through the article and make notes of the key points.

This can be done by underlining or highlighting key phrases in the article. One essential thing is to organize these points into an outline format, which includes an introduction and conclusion paragraph.

Another best and quick way to generate a precise summary of your research paper is to take assistance from the online text summarizer, like Summarizer.org .

The online summarizing tool gets the research paper and creates a precise summary of it by taking the important points.

Finally, you must edit your work for grammar and spelling errors before submitting it for grading.

The purpose of the research summary is to provide a comprehensive sum of everything that’s in the research. This includes a summarization of scientific/literal research, as well as of the writer’s aim and personal thoughts.

As for the summary length, it shouldn’t be more than 10% of the entire content. So, if your research is around 1000-words or so, then your summary should be 100-words. But, considering how most research papers are around 3000-4000 words, it should be 300-400 words.

Key pillars of a Research Summary

The summary of any research doesn’t just include the summarized text of the entire research paper. It includes a few other key things, which we’ll explore later on in this article. But, the purpose of a summary is to give proper insights to the reader, such as:

• The writer’s intention
• sources and bases of research
• the purpose & result.

That’s why it’s important to understand that the summary should tell your reader all these elements. So, the fundamentals of any summary include:

• Write a section and state the importance of the research paper from your perspective. In this section, you will have to describe the techniques, tools, and sources you employed to get the conclusion.
• Besides that, it’s also meant to provide a brief and descriptive explanation of the actionable aspect of your research. In other words, how it can be implemented in real life.
• Treat your research summary like a smaller article or blog. So, each important section of your research should be written within a subheading. However, this is highly optional to keep things organized.
• As mentioned before, the research summary shouldn’t exceed 300-400 words. But, some research summaries are known to surpass 10000-words. So, try to employ the 10% formula and write one-tenth of the entire length of your research paper.

These four main points allow you to understand how a research summary is different from the research itself. So, it’s like a documentary where research and other key factors are left to the science (research paper), while the narration explains the key points (research summary)

How do you write a Research Summary?

Writing a research summary is a straightforward affair. Yet, it requires some understanding, as it’s not a lengthy process but rather a tricky and technical one. In a research summary, a few boxes must be checked. To help you do just that, here are 6 things you should tend to separately:

A summary’s title can be the same as the title of your primary research. However, putting separate titles in both has a few benefits. Such as:

• A separate title shifts attention towards the conclusion.
• A different title can focus on the main point of your research.
• Using two different titles can provide a better abstract.

Speaking of an abstract, a summary is the abstract of your research. Therefore, a title representing that very thought is going to do a lot of good too. That’s why it’s better if the title of your summary differs from the title of your research paper.

2. Abstract

The abstract is the summarization of scientific or research methods used in your primary paper. This allows the reader to understand the pillars of the study conducted. For instance, there has been an array of astrological research since James Webb Space Telescope started sending images and data.

So, many research papers explain this Telescope’s technological evolution in their abstracts. This allows the reader to differentiate from the astrological research made by previous space crafts, such as Hubble or Chandra .

The point of providing this abstract is to ensure that the reader grasps the standards or boundaries within which the research was held.

3. Introduction

This is the part where you introduce your topic. In your main research, you’d dive right into the technicalities in this part. However, you’ll try to keep things mild in a research summary. Simply because it needs to summarize the key points in your main introduction.

So, a lot of introductions you’ll find as an example will be extensive in length. But, a research summary needs to be as concise as possible. Usually, in this part, a writer includes the basics and standards of investigation.

For instance, if your research is about James Webb’s latest findings , then you’ll identify how the studies conducted by this Telescope’s infrared and other technology made this study possible. That’s when your introduction will hook the reader into the main premise of your research.

4. Methodology / Study

This section needs to describe the methodology used by you in your research. Or the methodology you relied on when conducting this particular research or study. This allows the reader to grasp the fundamentals of your research, and it’s extremely important.

Because if the reader doesn’t understand your methods, then they will have no response to your studies. How should you tend to this? Include things such as:

• The surveys or reviews you used;
• include the samplings and experiment types you researched;
• provide a brief statistical analysis;
• give a primary reason to pick these particular methods.

Once again, leave the scientific intricacies for your primary research. But, describe the key methods that you employed. So, when the reader is perusing your final research, they’ll have your methods and study techniques in mind.

5. Results / Discussion

This section of your research needs to describe the results that you’ve achieved. Granted, some researchers will rely on results achieved by others. So, this part needs to explain how that happened – but not in detail.

The other section in this part will be a discussion. This is your interpretation of the results you’ve found. Thus, in the context of the results’ application, this section needs to dive into the theoretical understanding of your research. What will this section entail exactly? Here’s what:

• Things that you covered, including results;
• inferences you provided, given the context of your research;
• the theory archetype that you’ve tried to explain in the light of the methodology you employed;
• essential points or any limitations of the research.

These factors will help the reader grasp the final idea of your research. But, it’s not full circle yet, as the pulp will still be left for the actual research.

6. Conclusion

The final section of your summary is the conclusion. The key thing about the conclusion in your research summary, compared to your actual research, is that they could be different. For instance, the actual conclusion in your research should bring around the study.

However, the research in this summary should bring your own ideas and affirmations to full circle. Thus, this conclusion could and should be different from the ending of your research.

5 Tips for writing a Research Summary

Writing a research summary is easy once you tend to the technicalities. But, there are some tips and tricks that could make it easier. Remember, a research summary is the sum of your entire research. So, it doesn’t need to be as technical or in-depth as your primary work.

Thus, to make it easier for you, here are four tips you can follow:

1. Read & read again

Reading your own work repeatedly has many benefits. First, it’ll help you understand any mistakes or problems your research might have. After that, you’ll find a few key points that stand out from the others – that’s what you need to use in your summary.

So, the best advice anyone can give you is to read your research again and again. This will etch the idea in your mind and allow you to summarize it better.

2. Focus on key essentials in each section

As we discussed earlier, each section of your research has a key part. To write a thoroughly encapsulating summary, you need to focus on and find each such element in your research.

Doing so will give you enough leverage to write a summary that thoroughly condenses your research idea and gives you enough to write a summary out of it.

3. Write the research using a summarizing tool

The best advice you can get is to write a summary using a tool. Condensing each section might be a troublesome experience for some – as it can be time-consuming.

To avoid all that, you can simply take help from an online summarizer. It gets the lengthy content and creates a precise summary of it by using advanced AI technology.

As you can see, the tool condenses this particular section perfectly while the details are light.

Bringing that down to 10% or 20% will help you write each section accordingly. Thus, saving precious time and effort.

4. Word count limit

As mentioned earlier, word count is something you need to follow thoroughly. So, if your section is around 200-word, then read it again. And describe it to yourself in 20-words or so. Doing this to every section will help you write exactly a 10% summary of your research.

5. Get a second opinion

If you’re unsure about quality or quantity, get a second opinion. At times, ideas are in our minds, but we cannot find words to explain them. In research or any sort of creative process, getting a second opinion can save a lot of trouble.

There’s your guide to writing a research summary, folks. While it’s not different from condensing the entire premise of your research, writing it in simpler words will do wonders. So, try to follow the tips, tools, and ideas provided in this article, and write outstanding summaries for your research.

Frequently asked questions

What is a summary.

A summary is a short overview of the main points of an article or other source, written entirely in your own words. Want to make your life super easy? Try our free text summarizer today!

Frequently asked questions: Working with sources

Synthesizing sources means comparing and contrasting the work of other scholars to provide new insights.

It involves analyzing and interpreting the points of agreement and disagreement among sources.

You might synthesize sources in your literature review to give an overview of the field of research or throughout your paper when you want to contribute something new to existing research.

You can find sources online using databases and search engines like Google Scholar . Use Boolean operators or advanced search functions to narrow or expand your search.

For print sources, you can use your institution’s library database. This will allow you to explore the library’s catalog and to search relevant keywords.

Lateral reading is the act of evaluating the credibility of a source by comparing it with other sources. This allows you to:

• Verify evidence
• Contextualize information
• Find potential weaknesses

As you cannot possibly read every source related to your topic, it’s important to evaluate sources to assess their relevance. Use preliminary evaluation to determine whether a source is worth examining in more depth.

This involves:

• Reading abstracts , prefaces, introductions , and conclusions
• Looking at the table of contents to determine the scope of the work
• Consulting the index for key terms or the names of important scholars

An abstract concisely explains all the key points of an academic text such as a thesis , dissertation or journal article. It should summarize the whole text, not just introduce it.

An abstract is a type of summary , but summaries are also written elsewhere in academic writing . For example, you might summarize a source in a paper , in a literature review , or as a standalone assignment.

All can be done within seconds with our free text summarizer .

You might have to write a summary of a source:

• As a stand-alone assignment to prove you understand the material
• For your own use, to keep notes on your reading
• To provide an overview of other researchers’ work in a literature review
• In a paper , to summarize or introduce a relevant study

You can assess information and arguments critically by asking certain questions about the source. You can use the CRAAP test , focusing on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

Ask questions such as:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert?
• Why did the author publish it? What is their motivation?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence?

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

• Identify credible sources
• Evaluate and respond to arguments
• Assess alternative viewpoints
• Test hypotheses against relevant criteria

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

It is important to find credible sources and use those that you can be sure are sufficiently scholarly .

• Consult your institute’s library to find out what books, journals, research databases, and other types of sources they provide access to.
• Look for books published by respected academic publishing houses and university presses, as these are typically considered trustworthy sources.
• Look for journals that use a peer review process. This means that experts in the field assess the quality and credibility of an article before it is published.

In academic writing, the sources you cite should be credible and scholarly. Some of the main types of sources used are:

• Academic journals: These are the most up-to-date sources in academia. They are published more frequently than books and provide cutting-edge research.
• Books: These are great sources to use, as they are typically written by experts and provide an extensive overview and analysis of a specific topic.

Scholarly sources are written by experts in their field and are typically subjected to peer review . They are intended for a scholarly audience, include a full bibliography, and use scholarly or technical language. For these reasons, they are typically considered credible sources .

Popular sources like magazines and news articles are typically written by journalists. These types of sources usually don’t include a bibliography and are written for a popular, rather than academic, audience. They are not always reliable and may be written from a biased or uninformed perspective, but they can still be cited in some contexts.

There are many types of sources commonly used in research. These include:

• Journal articles
• Encyclopedias

You’ll likely use a variety of these sources throughout the research process , and the kinds of sources you use will depend on your research topic and goals.

You usually shouldn’t cite tertiary sources as evidence in your research paper, but you can use them in the beginning stages of the research process to:

• Establish background information
• Identify relevant keywords and terms
• Familiarize yourself with current debates in your field

Use tertiary sources in your preliminary research to find relevant primary and secondary sources that you will engage with in more depth during the writing process .

What constitutes a tertiary source depends on your research question and how you use the source.

To determine whether a source is tertiary, ask:

• Am I examining the source itself, or am I using it for background information?
• Does the source provide original information ( primary ) or analyze information from other sources ( secondary )? Or does it consolidate information from other sources (tertiary)?

Primary sources provide direct evidence about your research topic (photographs, personal letters, etc.).

Secondary sources interpret and comment on information from primary sources (academic books, journal articles, etc.).

Tertiary sources are reference works that identify and provide background information on primary and secondary sources . They do not provide original insights or analysis.

A tertiary source may list, summarize , or index primary and secondary sources or provide general information from a variety of sources. But it does not provide original interpretations or analysis.

Some examples of tertiary sources include:

• Bibliographies
• Dictionaries

It can sometimes be hard to distinguish accurate from inaccurate sources , especially online. Published articles are not always credible and can reflect a biased viewpoint without providing evidence to support their conclusions.

Information literacy is important because it helps you to be aware of such unreliable content and to evaluate sources effectively, both in an academic context and more generally.

Information literacy refers to a broad range of skills, including the ability to find, evaluate, and use sources of information effectively.

Being information literate means that you:

• Know how to find credible sources
• Use relevant sources to inform your research
• Understand what constitutes plagiarism
• Know how to cite your sources correctly

When searching for sources in databases, think of specific keywords that are relevant to your topic , and consider variations on them or synonyms that might be relevant.

Once you have a clear idea of your research parameters and key terms, choose a database that is relevant to your research (e.g., Medline, JSTOR, Project MUSE).

Find out if the database has a “subject search” option. This can help to refine your search. Use Boolean operators to combine your keywords, exclude specific search terms, and search exact phrases to find the most relevant sources.

Proximity operators are specific words used alongside your chosen keywords that let you specify the proximity of one keyword in relation to another.

The most common proximity operators include NEAR ( N x ), WITHIN ( W x ), and SENTENCE .

Each proximity operator has a unique function. For example, N x allows you to find sources that contain the specified keywords within a set number of words ( x ) of each other.

Boolean operators are specific words and symbols that you can use to expand or narrow your search parameters when using a database or search engine.

The most common Boolean operators are AND , OR , NOT or AND NOT , quotation marks “” , parentheses () , and asterisks * .

Each Boolean operator has a unique function. For example, the Boolean operator AND will provide search results containing both/all of your keywords.

A Boolean search uses specific words and symbols known as Boolean operators (e.g., AND , OR ) alongside keywords to limit or expand search results. Boolean searches allow you to:

• Prioritize keywords
• Exclude keywords
• Search exact keywords
• Search variations of your keywords

The CRAAP test is an acronym to help you evaluate the credibility of a source you are considering using. It is an important component of information literacy .

The CRAAP test has five main components:

• Currency: Is the source up to date?
• Relevance: Is the source relevant to your research?
• Authority: Where is the source published? Who is the author? Are they considered reputable and trustworthy in their field?
• Accuracy: Is the source supported by evidence? Are the claims cited correctly?
• Purpose: What was the motive behind publishing this source?

To avoid plagiarism when summarizing an article or other source, follow these two rules:

• Write the summary entirely in your own words by paraphrasing the author’s ideas.
• Cite the source with an in-text citation and a full reference so your reader can easily find the original text.

A summary is always much shorter than the original text. The length of a summary can range from just a few sentences to several paragraphs; it depends on the length of the article you’re summarizing, and on the purpose of the summary.

Ask our team

Want to contact us directly? No problem.  We  are always here for you.

• Email [email protected]
• Start live chat
• Call +1 (510) 822-8066
• WhatsApp +31 20 261 6040

Our team helps students graduate by offering:

• A world-class citation generator
• Plagiarism Checker software powered by Turnitin
• Innovative Citation Checker software
• Professional proofreading services
• Over 300 helpful articles about academic writing, citing sources, plagiarism, and more

Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:

• PhD dissertations
• Research proposals
• Personal statements
• Admission essays
• Motivation letters
• Reflection papers
• Capstone projects

Scribbr’s Plagiarism Checker is powered by elements of Turnitin’s Similarity Checker , namely the plagiarism detection software and the Internet Archive and Premium Scholarly Publications content databases .

The add-on AI detector is powered by Scribbr’s proprietary software.

The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.

You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .

Six elements a research summary should include

Summarizing a research paper (or papers) sounds like it should be a pretty quick, easy task. After all, how hard can writing 200 words be?! But whether you’re writing a summary to include in your essay or dissertation, or you need to draft a compelling abstract for your own paper, distilling complex research into an informative, easy-to-read snapshot can be one of the most daunting parts of the research process. For that reason, it’s often the activity that gets left to last.

Having a few questions top of mind while you draft your summary can really help to structure your thoughts and make sure you include the most important aspects of the research. In short, every academic summary should cover ‘the why’, ‘the how’, ‘the who’ and ‘the what’ of a study. Asking yourself the following six questions as you start to think about your summary can help you to structure your thoughts and find the right words.

1.  Why is this study necessary and important?

The ‘why’ can often be found in the first sentence of the introduction or background of a research article. Let’s have a look at a 2014 paper about plastic pollution in the world’s oceans (1) :

" Plastic pollution is globally distributed across all oceans due to its properties of buoyancy and durability, and the sorption of toxicants to plastic while traveling through the environment have led some researchers to claim that synthetic polymers in the ocean should be regarded as hazardous waste."

Another quick way of identifying the ‘why’ of the research is to search for the subject of the study (eg. ‘Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans’) in Wikipedia. This can help inject wider significance into your research summary, for example:

"Waterborne plastic poses a serious threat to fish , seabirds , marine reptiles , and marine mammals , as well as to boats and coasts."

The Abstract of this paper also points to a gap in the research – the lack of data on the amount of plastic waste in the Southern Hemisphere.

2.    Who were the participants?

It’s good practice to include statistical information about the study subjects or participants in your summary. This will quickly tell your reader how well the key findings are backed up. This part of the summary can combine a short narrative description of the participants (eg. age, location etc); what was ‘done’ to the participants as part of the study; what impact the study had on the participants and a brief description of the control group.

3.    What were the methods used?

How was the study carried out? What kind of materials were used to conduct the study and in what quantities or doses? Again, where possible include statistics here: number of materials; sample sizes; metrics (weight, volume, concentration etc). Here’s an example summary of a methods section from the above paper on ocean plastic:

"Net tows were conducted using neuston nets with a standard mesh size of 0.33 mm towed between 0.5 and 2 m s −1 at the sea surface for 15–60 minutes outside of the vessel’s wake to avoid downwelling of debris. Samples were preserved in 5% formalin.Microplastic was manually separated from natural debris, sorted through stacked Tyler sieves into three size classes counted individually and weighed together."

Including information about the consistency of methods or techniques used will help underline the credibility of the research.

4.    What were the key findings of the study?

Stick to the high level, headline finding of the research here. What do the quantitative results of the study reveal that was previously unknown? Again, including statistics where you can will help reinforce the findings, but remember to keep it brief. Here’s an example from the same plastic pollution paper:

"Based on the model results, the authors estimate that at least 5.25 trillion plastic particles weighing 268,940 tons are currently floating at sea."

5.    What conclusion was drawn from the research?

At this stage,  try to focus on the overall outcome of the research, but also what makes the study both significant and novel. What was uncovered as part of the research that wasn’t previously known? Do the results of the study tell us something different to what was previously known or assumed?In the plastic pollution paper, what was previously unknown was an estimate of the amount of plastic in the oceans of the Southern Hemisphere. The authors explain that their results confirm the same pattern of dispersal in the Southern Hemisphere as for the Northern Hemisphere:

"Surprisingly, the total amounts of plastics determined for the southern hemisphere oceans are within the same range as for the northern hemisphere oceans, which is unexpected given that inputs are substantially higher in the northern than in the southern hemisphere ."

6.    What kind of relevance does the research have for the wider world? (the big why)

Rounding off your summary with a powerful statement that shows how the outcome of the research has a wider significance is good practice. The ‘big why’ can often be found in the Discussion or at the end of the Conclusion of a research article, and often in the Abstract as well.Including clear, concise research summaries in your essay or dissertation can be very beneficial in strengthening your argument and demonstrating your understanding of complex research, all of which can help to improve your final grade. Using this six-point formula as a way of structuring your summary will also help you to think more critically about the research you read and make it easier for you to communicate your understanding both verbally and in writing. Try out Scholarcy’s Smart Summarizer to help draft your own research summary. ‍

• ‍ ‍ Eriksen, M., Lebreton, L., Carson, H., Thiel, M., Moore, C., Borerro, J., Galgani, F., Ryan, P. and Reisser, J., 2014. Plastic Pollution in the World's Oceans: More than 5 Trillion Plastic Pieces Weighing over 250,000 Tons Afloat at Sea. PLoS ONE , 9(12), p.e111913.

Project Types We Cover

• Admissions Essay
• PowerPoint Presentation
• Research Paper
• Book Reviews
• Personal Statement
• Ph.D Dissertation
• Proofreading

Academic Fields & Subjects

• Programming
• Computer Science
• Other projects we help with
• Our Experts
• Plagiarism Checker
• Writing Tips

How to Write Research Summary

By: Henrique Bertulino

A research summary or a research article comprehensively covers a topic. It is a brief overview of a study typically from a peer-reviewed journal. Many universities and colleges give such assignments and assess the students' performance based on how they interpret the scientific knowledge and data presented in the written academic article . If you are a student worried about your next assignment that involves in-depth analysis, then you have landed on the right page. The way you analyze and provide critical review determines your grades. That is why learning how to summarize research is crucial for your academic success.

Find Out the Focus Area of Your Paper

Assemble all relevant points, read and make an analysis, find additional literature, start writing the summary, proofread and edit, dos and don'ts of writing a research summary, step-by-step guide to writing a summary paper.

Writing a research report requires you to read the entire article thoroughly. First, skim through the paper and understand the gist of the article. Once you have gone through the contents, you will have a fairly good idea of what the paper is all about. Identify the topic and build the content around it. Read other papers and information on the same topic to build a better understanding of the subject. It is important to gauge the purpose of the research quickly. Figure out:

• What is the research all about?
• How has the researcher addressed the issue?
• What are the key findings?

The main points can be listed in bullet form. This way, you will not miss out on any important point.

Jot down all the key points presented in the article. When you quickly go through the paper, you will identify the research question, hypothesis, and purpose behind the entire research. Here is what you should note down when skimming through the article.

• Write down the purpose of the research;
• Mention the research question;
• Note the hypothesis presented;
• Determine the methodology used;
• Find out the key findings;
• The interpretation and critical analysis of those key points;
• Present your analysis.

When scanning through the research project, you must scribble down your thoughts in the margins. This helps narrow down your points, and you will be able to analyze the summary better.

Although there is an abstract section in the research paper that contains concise information, it still can't be fully relied on. You must make notes and write down all the points as you skim through the article. This way, you won't miss out on any important information. At the same time, the notes will help you formulate a better research summary. Don't bank on the abstract and use it as a summarized version.

After skimming through the original document, you must now give it a good read. Read it in detail from start to finish. Take a look at the notes you made in the margins as well. Read all the sections in the content to summarize it. This way, you can address relevant points.

• How has the research contributed to answering the main question?
• Is the methodology working well with the central concept?
• Which points did the researcher not discuss?
• Does the research make an impact in future studies?
• What is the scope of the research project?

It is a good idea to read out the summary to someone you know. If you know the topic well and you can easily narrate it to someone else, this means you are now ready to write an executive summary on your own. Please, note that summary writing doesn't mean that you have to duplicate what is already written. Do not write the same words. Instead, when writing the summary, close the original article so that you avoid copying the content.

Don't just stick to the information given in the paper. Collect research articles and information from other sources as well. Your literature review should comprise on various topics. Study any research paper you find on this particular topic. Include it when summarizing. This shows that you have taken the assignment seriously and have done some background reading.

Be clear and use short sentences to convey your message. It is somewhat like an abstract but in more detail. Make sure to use only relevant information to write a research summary. Do not clutter and use wordiness. Follow this order to write a compelling summary.

• State the research question;
• Write the hypothesis;
• Discuss the methodology used in the paper, including the number of participants, independent and dependent variables, and the process;
• Mention the results and key findings;
• Analyze the data and give your input;
• Remember that the interpretation and result should be related to the hypothesis;
• The first draft should be written in a carefree way, you can always edit it later.

It is important to keep your summary papers compact and concise. You don't want to lose the purpose of your research summary by overstuffing keywords. Don't write generic statements. It should be relevant to the topic. Once you have written the paper, make sure it is plagiarism-free. You don't earn a bad grade just because you have used the same words as written in the original document. Here are a few points to consider when proofreading your research summary.

• Make sure all the information is covered;
• Double-check your notes and literature review to ensure nothing is missed out;
• Paraphrase quotes instead of copying them as are, or else it could be counted as plagiarism;
• Cut down unnecessary long sentences;
• Check out for grammar and spellings;
• Avoid any typo errors;
• Read the summary out loud;
• Tweak the article for better clarity.

Your summary is ready to be submitted. Before you send the assignment to your professor, make sure to keep a check on these dos and don'ts of submitting a research paper.

• Use appropriate subheadings where necessary;
• Do some background reading;
• Make notes as you read;
• Add relevant literature and additional findings;
• Paraphrase quotes of famous personalities instead of copying them as is;
• Do make sure that it is not a copy of the original document;
• Read it out loud before submitting.
• Don't begin writing before finding out the purpose of the research;
• Don't rely too much on the abstract;
• Don't clutter the document with heavy sounding words;
• Avoid plagiarism. Make sure to avoid similar words;
• Avoid wordiness and overstuffing of keywords.

This simple guide to writing an impressive research summary will help you earn a good grade in your assignment. You will be able to understand the topic of your study in detail. Edit the document only when you have finished writing your first draft. Good luck!

User ratings:

User ratings is 3.5 stars.

3.5 /5 ( 7 Votes)

Head of Customer Success

I'm a medical doctor and brand manager. The process of getting into Med school and studying at it made me learn and apply many strategies to keep my productivity high while spending less time and effort. As a working student, I had to figure out how to study smarter, not harder. During this period, my interest in neurology and psychiatry, as well as my aspiration to help others, intensified. At Studybay, I use my knowledge, skills, and experience to develop helpful solutions for students and make their study paths more productive and fun.

Add Your Comment

We are very interested to know your opinion

Upgrade your writing skills!

Try our AI essay writer from Studybay today!

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

How to Write a Lay Summary: 10 Tips for Researchers

Once you know what a lay summary is, the next question you’ll probably be asking yourself is ‘how to write a lay summary?’ But why is this important for researchers? For one, there has been a surge in research output. The past decade has seen a 4% annual increase in peer-reviewed science and engineering (S&E) journal articles and conference papers being published. 1 However, it’s not just the increasing number of published articles but the visibility your work receives that indicates a researcher’s productivity and success. While researchers often come up with ground-breaking and crucial findings, it can be challenging for non-academics and even specialists from other disciplines to understand its importance. Communicating research findings to a broader audience is a crucial aspect of any scholarly work. So in this article, we will explore the importance of writing a lay summary, explaining how to write a lay summary to ensure your research reaches and resonates with a wider audience.

Table of Contents

What is a lay summary in research?

Lay summaries are condensed descriptions of research findings that are written in a simple way so that wider audience can understand the work presented with ease. Writing a lay summary also aids in bridging the gap between often complex research work and non-specialist readers, providing them with a clear overview of the research’s purpose, key findings, and real-world implications. By making the published study more widely available, researchers can foster inclusivity, promote wider engagement, and spark new research, and influence public policy. Writing a lay summary in a simple, compelling manner goes a long way in not only ensuring visibility, it also makes it more comprehensible and usable for journalists, policymakers, and people around the world.

4 Reasons you need to write an effective lay summary

• Create greater visibility: An impactful lay summary is a great way of describing and communicating details of the research done to the general public and can help those who don’t have an academic background to better understand your work.
• Enhance transparency: A well-crafted lay summary can boost transparency, adding to the reliability and credibility of your research. A lay summary that describes and communicates your research findings in a clear, simple way leaves little room for misrepresentation.
• Improve engagement: A succinct lay summary makes research findings easier to understand and highlights its significance. This means that audiences can engage more actively with your work, leading to an increase in the number of citations.
• Widen research impact: Writing a lay summary that is engaging and compelling helps researchers effectively convey their research findings, emphasize their work’s applicability and potential, and drive real-world impact.

How to write a lay summary of scientific papers

A lay summary of a scientific paper doesn’t have to be challenging to write. Here are some simple steps to keep in mind when writing a lay summary.

1. Identify your audience

Before you start crafting your lay summary, consider who your target audience is and tailor your language accordingly. This will make your lay summary more engaging and relevant to your readers, whether they’re policymakers, patients, or the general public.

2. Keep it simple, yet informative

Simplicity is the key to an effective lay summary, so avoid jargon and technical terms that might confuse your readers. Think of it as telling a story rather than presenting scientific data and focus on conveying the core message of your research in straightforward manner.

3. Highlight the importance

Describe the real-world impact of your findings and how they contribute to solving relevant issues or advancing knowledge in your field. Clearly articulating the significance of your work can keep your readers interested and invested in your research.

4. Follow a logical structure

A well-structured lay summary guides the reader through your research logically, step by step. When writing a lay summary, cover the problem you aimed to address, your methodology and key findings, and the implications and potential applications of your research.

5. Provide relevant context

Avoid assuming prior knowledge from your audience, provide enough context and background information to help readers understand your research without overwhelming them with technical details.

6. Use engaging examples

Analogies or real-life scenarios can help your audience grasp complex concepts and appreciate the relevance of your research. So integrate relatable examples when writing a lay summary.

7. Emphasize the benefits

Highlight the benefits of your research, how it can improve lives or contribute to societal advancements, and the practical implications of your work to resonate with readers.

8. Add the final touches

Employ formatting styles like subheads and bullet points and add visual elements like illustrations, tables, or graphs, to easily present data. Write a catchy headline or introduction and use a conversational tone when writing the lay summary.

9. Seek peer feedback

Get colleagues or friends outside your field to review your lay summary. Their feedback will help you gauge whether your summary successfully conveys the essence of your research to a broader audience.

10. Proofread and edit

As the last step, proofread and edit your work to polish language, grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure. Clear, error-free writing lends credibility to your research, ensuring it’s taken seriously and leaves a lasting impression on your readers.

Lay Summaries vs. Abstracts

It is common for to get confused between research paper abstracts and lay summaries. While both are used to convey research findings, they have vastly different purposes and audiences.

Abstracts provide a synopsis of a research project that is written for an audience of scholars and experts interested in a particular field of study. An abstract usually includes complex concepts and technical terms when trying to explain the relevance of the research topic. Researchers use an abstract to outline and highlight their objectives, approach, and finding. Abstracts provide a summary of the research paper so that readers may quickly grasp its ideas and decide whether it is pertinent to their areas of interest. An abstract requires usually is more detailed and longer than a lay summary.

Lay summaries on the other hand offer non-technical explanations of a research project. It is typically written for a wider audience, including non-academics and experts from other fields. A lay summary’s main objective is to make the study findings accessible to those who are not subject-matter experts by using analogies to simplify concepts. They highlight the practical relevance of the research in a succinct, impactful way.

Though both lay summaries and abstracts are different, if written in a compelling way, they can be powerful tools to engage readers and help you garner greater visibility for your work.

References:

1.       India is world’s third largest producer of scientific articles, following China and US: Report. India Today, Jan 2, 2020. Available online at https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/latest-studies/story/india-is-world-s-third-largest-producer-of-scientific-articles-following-china-and-us-report-1633351-2020-01-02

R Discovery is a literature search and research reading platform that accelerates your research discovery journey by keeping you updated on the latest, most relevant scholarly content. With 250M+ research articles sourced from trusted aggregators like CrossRef, Unpaywall, PubMed, PubMed Central, Open Alex and top publishing houses like Springer Nature, JAMA, IOP, Taylor & Francis, NEJM, BMJ, Karger, SAGE, Emerald Publishing and more, R Discovery puts a world of research at your fingertips.  

Try R Discovery Prime FREE for 1 week or upgrade at just US$72 a year to access premium features that let you listen to research on the go, read in your language, collaborate with peers, auto sync with reference managers, and much more. Choose a simpler, smarter way to find and read research – Download the app and start your free 7-day trial today !  

Related Posts

Research in Shorts: R Discovery’s New Feature Helps Academics Assess Relevant Papers in 2mins 

How Does R Discovery’s Interplatform Capability Enhance Research Accessibility 

The Sheridan Libraries

• Write a Literature Review
• Sheridan Libraries
• Evaluate This link opens in a new window

Not every source you found should be included in your annotated bibliography or lit review. Only include the most relevant and most important sources.

Get Organized

• Lit Review Prep Use this template to help you evaluate your sources, create article summaries for an annotated bibliography, and a synthesis matrix for your lit review outline.

Summarize your Sources

Summarize each source: Determine the most important and relevant information from each source, such as the findings, methodology, theories, etc.  Consider using an article summary, or study summary to help you organize and summarize your sources.

Paraphrasing

• Use your own words, and do not copy and paste the abstract
• The library's tutorials about plagiarism are excellent, and will help you with paraphasing correctly

Annotated Bibliographies

     Annotated bibliographies can help you clearly see and understand the research before diving into organizing and writing your literature review.        Although typically part of the "summarize" step of the literature review, annotations should not merely be summaries of each article - instead, they should be critical evaluations of the source, and help determine a source's usefulness for your lit review.  

Definition:

A list of citations on a particular topic followed by an evaluation of the source’s argument and other relevant material including its intended audience, sources of evidence, and methodology

• Explore your topic.
• Appraise issues or factors associated with your professional practice and research topic.
• Help you get started with the literature review.
• Think critically about your topic, and the literature.

Steps to Creating an Annotated Bibliography:

• Find Your Sources
• Read Your Sources
• Identify the Most Relevant Sources
• Cite your Sources
• Write Annotations

Annotated Bibliography Resources

• Purdue Owl Guide
• Cornell Annotated Bibliography Guide
• << Previous: Evaluate
• Next: Synthesize >>
• Last Updated: Jul 30, 2024 1:42 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.jhu.edu/lit-review

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Happiness Hub Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• Happiness Hub
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• College University and Postgraduate
• Academic Writing
• Research Papers

How to Write a Research Synopsis: Template, Examples, & More

Last Updated: May 9, 2024 Fact Checked

Research Synopsis Template

• Organizing & Formatting
• Writing Your Synopsis
• Reviewing & Editing

This article was reviewed by Gerald Posner and by wikiHow staff writer, Raven Minyard, BA . Gerald Posner is an Author & Journalist based in Miami, Florida. With over 35 years of experience, he specializes in investigative journalism, nonfiction books, and editorials. He holds a law degree from UC College of the Law, San Francisco, and a BA in Political Science from the University of California-Berkeley. He’s the author of thirteen books, including several New York Times bestsellers, the winner of the Florida Book Award for General Nonfiction, and has been a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in History. He was also shortlisted for the Best Business Book of 2020 by the Society for Advancing Business Editing and Writing. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 272,806 times.

A research synopsis describes the plan for your research project and is typically submitted to professors or department heads so they can approve your project. Most synopses are between 3,000 and 4,000 words and provide your research objectives and methods. While the specific types of information you need to include in your synopsis may vary depending on your department guidelines, most synopses include the same basic sections. In this article, we’ll walk you step-by-step through everything you need to know to write a synopsis for research.

Things You Should Know

• Begin your research synopsis by introducing the question your research will answer and its importance to your field.
• List 2 or 3 specific objectives you hope to achieve and how they will advance your field.
• Discuss your methodology to demonstrate why the study design you chose is appropriate for your research question.

Organizing Your Research Synopsis

• Find out what citation format you’re supposed to use, as well as whether you’re expected to use parenthetical references or footnotes in the body of your synopsis.
• If you have questions about anything in your guidelines, ask your instructor or advisor to ensure you follow them correctly.

• Title: the title of your study
• Abstract: a summary of your research synopsis
• Introduction: identifies and describes your research question
• Literature Review: a review of existing relevant research
• Objectives: goals you hope to accomplish through your study
• Hypotheses: results you expect to find through your research
• Methodology and methods: explains the methods you’ll use to complete your study
• References: a list of any references used in citations

Tip: Your synopsis might have additional sections, depending on your discipline and the type of research you're conducting. Talk to your instructor or advisor about which sections are required for your department.

• Keep in mind that you might not end up using all the sources you initially found. After you've finished your synopsis, go back and delete the ones you didn't use.

Writing Your Research Synopsis

• Your title should be a brief and specific reflection of the main objectives of your study. In general, it should be under 50 words and should avoid unneeded phrases like “an investigation into.”
• On the other hand, avoid a title that’s too short, as well. For example, a title like “A Study of Urban Heating” is too short and doesn’t provide any insight into the specifics of your research.

• The introduction allows you to explain to your reader exactly why the question you’re trying to answer is vital and how your knowledge and experience make you the best researcher to tackle it.
• Support most of the statements in your introduction with other studies in the area that support the importance of your question. For example, you might cite a previous study that mentions your problem as an area where further research needs to be done.
• The length of your introduction will vary depending on the overall length of your synopsis as well as the ultimate length of your eventual paper after you’ve finished your research. Generally, it will cover the first page or two of your synopsis.

• For example, try finding relevant literature through educational journals or bulletins from organizations like WHO and CDC.
• Typically, a thorough literature review discusses 8 to 10 previous studies related to your research problem.
• As with the introduction, the length of your literature review will vary depending on the overall length of your synopsis. Generally, it will be about the same length as your introduction.
• Try to use the most current research available and avoid sources over 5 years old.

• For example, an objective for research on urban heating could be “to compare urban heat modification caused by vegetation of mixed species considering the 5 most common urban trees in an area.”
• Generally, the overall objective doesn’t relate to solving a specific problem or answering a specific question. Rather, it describes how your particular project will advance your field.
• For specific objectives, think in terms of action verbs like “quantify” or “compare.” Here, you’re hoping to gain a better understanding of associations between particular variables.

• Specify the sources you used and the reasons you have arrived at your hypotheses. Typically, these will come from prior studies that have shown similar relationships.
• For example, suppose a prior study showed that children who were home-schooled were less likely to be in fraternities or sororities in college. You might use that study to back up a hypothesis that home-schooled children are more independent and less likely to need strong friendship support networks.

• Expect your methodology to be at least as long as either your introduction or your literature review, if not longer. Include enough detail that your reader can fully understand how you’re going to carry out your study.
• This section of your synopsis may include information about how you plan to collect and analyze your data, the overall design of your study, and your sampling methods, if necessary. Include information about the study setting, like the facilities and equipment that are available to you to carry out your study.
• For example, your research work may take place in a hospital, and you may use cluster sampling to gather data.

• Use between 100 and 200 words to give your readers a basic understanding of your research project.
• Include a clear statement of the problem, the main goals or objectives of your study, the theories or conceptual framework your research relies upon, and the methods you’ll use to reach your goals or objectives.

Tip: Jot down a few notes as you draft your other sections that you can compile for your abstract to keep your writing more efficient.

Reviewing and Editing Your Research Synopsis

• If you don’t have that kind of time because you’re up against a deadline, at least take a few hours away from your synopsis before you go back to edit it. Do something entirely unrelated to your research, like taking a walk or going to a movie.

• Eliminate sentences that don’t add any new information. Even the longest synopsis is a brief document—make sure every word needs to be there and counts for something.
• Get rid of jargon and terms of art in your field that could be better explained in plain language. Even though your likely readers are people who are well-versed in your field, providing plain language descriptions shows you know what you’re talking about. Using jargon can seem like you’re trying to sound like you know more than you actually do.

Tip: Free apps, such as Grammarly and Hemingway App, can help you identify grammatical errors as well as areas where your writing could be clearer. However, you shouldn't rely solely on apps since they can miss things.

• Reference list formatting is very particular. Read your references out loud, with the punctuation and spacing, to pick up on errors you wouldn’t have noticed if you’d just read over them.
• Compare your format to the one in the stylebook you’re using and make sure all of your entries are correct.

• Read your synopsis backward by starting on the last word and reading each word separately from the last to the first. This helps isolate spelling errors. Reading backward sentence by sentence helps you isolate grammatical errors without being distracted by the content.
• Print your synopsis and circle every punctuation mark with a red pen. Then, go through them and focus on whether they’re correct.
• Read your synopsis out loud, including the punctuation, as though you were dictating the synopsis.

• Have at least one person who isn’t familiar with your area of study look over your synopsis. If they can understand your project, you know your writing is clear. If any parts confuse them, then that’s an area where you can improve the clarity of your writing.

Expert Q&A

• If you make significant changes to your synopsis after your first or second round of editing, you may need to proofread it again to make sure you didn’t introduce any new errors. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://admin.umt.edu.pk/Media/Site/iib1/FileManager/FORMAT%20OF%20SYNOPSIS%2012-10-2018.pdf
• ↑ https://www.scientificstyleandformat.org/Tools/SSF-Citation-Quick-Guide.html
• ↑ https://numspak.edu.pk/upload/media/Guidelines%20for%20Synopsis%20Writing1531455748.pdf
• ↑ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279917593_Research_synopsis_guidelines
• ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/editing-and-proofreading/
• ↑ https://www.cornerstone.edu/blog-post/six-steps-to-really-edit-your-paper/

About This Article

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Jul 25, 2022

Did this article help you?

Wave Bubble

Aug 31, 2021

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Don’t miss out! Sign up for

wikiHow’s newsletter

Literature Reviews

What is a Literature Review?

• Steps for Creating a Literature Review
• Providing Evidence / Critical Analysis
• Challenges when writing a Literature Review
• Systematic Literature Reviews

A literature review is an academic text that surveys, synthesizes, and critically evaluates the existing literature on a specific topic. It is typically required for theses, dissertations, or long reports and  serves several key purposes:

• Surveying the Literature : It involves a comprehensive search and examination of relevant academic books, journal articles, and other sources related to the chosen topic.
• Synthesizing Information : The literature review summarizes and organizes the information found in the literature, often identifying patterns, themes, and gaps in the current knowledge.
• Critical Analysis : It critically analyzes the collected information, highlighting limitations, gaps, and areas of controversy, and suggests directions for future research.
• Establishing Context : It places the current research within the broader context of the field, demonstrating how the new research builds on or diverges from previous studies.

Types of Literature Reviews

Literature reviews can take various forms, including:

• Narrative Reviews : These provide a qualitative summary of the literature and are often used to give a broad overview of a topic. They may be less structured and more subjective, focusing on synthesizing the literature to support a particular viewpoint.
• Systematic Reviews : These are more rigorous and structured, following a specific methodology to identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies on a particular question. They aim to minimize bias and provide a comprehensive summary of the existing evidence.
• Integrative Reviews : Similar to systematic reviews, but they aim to generate new knowledge by integrating findings from different studies to develop new theories or frameworks.

Importance of Literature Reviews

• Foundation for Research : They provide a solid background for new research projects, helping to justify the research question and methodology.

Identifying Gaps : Literature reviews highlight areas where knowledge is lacking, guiding future research efforts.

• Building Credibility : Demonstrating familiarity with existing research enhances the credibility of the researcher and their work.

In summary, a literature review is a critical component of academic research that helps to frame the current state of knowledge, identify gaps, and provide  a basis for new research.

The research, the body of current literature, and the particular objectives should all influence the structure of a literature review. It is also critical to remember that creating a literature review is an ongoing process - as one reads and analyzes the literature, one's understanding may change, which could require rearranging the literature review.

Paré, G. and Kitsiou, S. (2017) 'Methods for Literature Reviews' , in: Lau, F. and Kuziemsky, C. (eds.)  Handbook of eHealth evaluation: an evidence-based approach . Victoria (BC): University of Victoria.

Perplexity AI (2024) Perplexity AI response to Kathy Neville, 31 July.       

Royal Literary Fund (2024)  The structure of a literature review.  Available at: https://www.rlf.org.uk/resources/the-structure-of-a-literature-review/ (Accessed: 23 July 2024).

Library Services for Undergraduate Research (2024) Literature review: a definition . Available at: https://libguides.wustl.edu/our?p=302677 (Accessed: 31 July 2024).

Further Reading:

Methods for Literature Reviews

Literature Review (The University of Edinburgh)

Literature Reviews (University of Sheffield)

• How to Write a Literature Review Paper? Wee, Bert Van ; Banister, David ISBN: 0144-1647

• Next: Steps for Creating a Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Sep 4, 2024 11:43 AM
• URL: https://library.lsbu.ac.uk/literaturereviews

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• Executive Summary
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

An executive summary is a thorough overview of a research report or other type of document that synthesizes key points for its readers, saving them time and preparing them to understand the study's overall content. It is a separate, stand-alone document of sufficient detail and clarity to ensure that the reader can completely understand the contents of the main research study. An executive summary can be anywhere from 1-10 pages long depending on the length of the report, or it can be the summary of more than one document [e.g., papers submitted for a group project].

Bailey, Edward, P. The Plain English Approach to Business Writing . (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 73-80 Todorovic, Zelimir William and Marietta Wolczacka Frye. “Writing Effective Executive Summaries: An Interdisciplinary Examination.” In United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Conference Proceedings . (Decatur, IL: United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 2009): pp. 662-691.

Importance of a Good Executive Summary

Although an executive summary is similar to an abstract in that they both summarize the contents of a research study, there are several key differences. With research abstracts, the author's recommendations are rarely included, or if they are, they are implicit rather than explicit. Recommendations are generally not stated in academic abstracts because scholars operate in a discursive environment, where debates, discussions, and dialogs are meant to precede the implementation of any new research findings. The conceptual nature of much academic writing also means that recommendations arising from the findings are distributed widely and not easily or usefully encapsulated. Executive summaries are used mainly when a research study has been developed for an organizational partner, funding entity, or other external group that participated in the research . In such cases, the research report and executive summary are often written for policy makers outside of academe, while abstracts are written for the academic community. Professors, therefore, assign the writing of executive summaries so students can practice synthesizing and writing about the contents of comprehensive research studies for external stakeholder groups.

When preparing to write, keep in mind that:

• An executive summary is not an abstract.
• An executive summary is not an introduction.
• An executive summary is not a preface.
• An executive summary is not a random collection of highlights.

Christensen, Jay. Executive Summaries Complete The Report. California State University Northridge; Clayton, John. "Writing an Executive Summary that Means Business." Harvard Management Communication Letter (July 2003): 2-4; Keller, Chuck. "Stay Healthy with a Winning Executive Summary." Technical Communication 41 (1994): 511-517; Murphy, Herta A., Herbert W. Hildebrandt, and Jane P. Thomas. Effective Business Communications . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997; Vassallo, Philip. "Executive Summaries: Where Less Really is More." ETC.: A Review of General Semantics 60 (Spring 2003): 83-90 .

Structure and Writing Style

Writing an Executive Summary

Read the Entire Document This may go without saying, but it is critically important that you read the entire research study thoroughly from start to finish before you begin to write the executive summary. Take notes as you go along, highlighting important statements of fact, key findings, and recommended courses of action. This will better prepare you for how to organize and summarize the study. Remember this is not a brief abstract of 300 words or less but, essentially, a mini-paper of your paper, with a focus on recommendations.

Isolate the Major Points Within the Original Document Choose which parts of the document are the most important to those who will read it. These points must be included within the executive summary in order to provide a thorough and complete explanation of what the document is trying to convey.

Separate the Main Sections Closely examine each section of the original document and discern the main differences in each. After you have a firm understanding about what each section offers in respect to the other sections, write a few sentences for each section describing the main ideas. Although the format may vary, the main sections of an executive summary likely will include the following:

• An opening statement, with brief background information,
• The purpose of research study,
• Method of data gathering and analysis,
• Overview of findings, and,
• A description of each recommendation, accompanied by a justification. Note that the recommendations are sometimes quoted verbatim from the research study.

Combine the Information Use the information gathered to combine them into an executive summary that is no longer than 10% of the original document. Be concise! The purpose is to provide a brief explanation of the entire document with a focus on the recommendations that have emerged from your research. How you word this will likely differ depending on your audience and what they care about most. If necessary, selectively incorporate bullet points for emphasis and brevity. Re-read your Executive Summary After you've completed your executive summary, let it sit for a while before coming back to re-read it. Check to make sure that the summary will make sense as a separate document from the full research study. By taking some time before re-reading it, you allow yourself to see the summary with fresh, unbiased eyes.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Length of the Executive Summary As a general rule, the correct length of an executive summary is that it meets the criteria of no more pages than 10% of the number of pages in the original document, with an upper limit of no more than ten pages [i.e., ten pages for a 100 page document]. This requirement keeps the document short enough to be read by your audience, but long enough to allow it to be a complete, stand-alone synopsis. Cutting and Pasting With the exception of specific recommendations made in the study, do not simply cut and paste whole sections of the original document into the executive summary. You should paraphrase information from the longer document. Avoid taking up space with excessive subtitles and lists, unless they are absolutely necessary for the reader to have a complete understanding of the original document. Consider the Audience Although unlikely to be required by your professor, there is the possibility that more than one executive summary will have to be written for a given document [e.g., one for policy-makers, one for private industry, one for philanthropists]. This may only necessitate the rewriting of the introduction and conclusion, but it could require rewriting the entire summary in order to fit the needs of the reader. If necessary, be sure to consider the types of audiences who may benefit from your study and make adjustments accordingly. Clarity in Writing One of the biggest mistakes you can make is related to the clarity of your executive summary. Always note that your audience [or audiences] are likely seeing your research study for the first time. The best way to avoid a disorganized or cluttered executive summary is to write it after the study is completed. Always follow the same strategies for proofreading that you would for any research paper. Use Strong and Positive Language Don’t weaken your executive summary with passive, imprecise language. The executive summary is a stand-alone document intended to convince the reader to make a decision concerning whether to implement the recommendations you make. Once convinced, it is assumed that the full document will provide the details needed to implement the recommendations. Although you should resist the temptation to pad your summary with pleas or biased statements, do pay particular attention to ensuring that a sense of urgency is created in the implications, recommendations, and conclusions presented in the executive summary. Be sure to target readers who are likely to implement the recommendations.

Bailey, Edward, P. The Plain English Approach to Business Writing . (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 73-80; Christensen, Jay. Executive Summaries Complete The Report. California State University Northridge; Executive Summaries. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Clayton, John. "Writing an Executive Summary That Means Business." Harvard Management Communication Letter , 2003; Executive Summary. University Writing Center. Texas A&M University;  Green, Duncan. Writing an Executive Summary.   Oxfam’s Research Guidelines series ; Guidelines for Writing an Executive Summary. Astia.org; Markowitz, Eric. How to Write an Executive Summary. Inc. Magazine, September, 15, 2010; Kawaski, Guy. The Art of the Executive Summary. "How to Change the World" blog; Keller, Chuck. "Stay Healthy with a Winning Executive Summary." Technical Communication 41 (1994): 511-517; The Report Abstract and Executive Summary. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing Executive Summaries. Effective Writing Center. University of Maryland; Kolin, Philip. Successful Writing at Work . 10th edition. (Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2013), p. 435-437; Moral, Mary. "Writing Recommendations and Executive Summaries." Keeping Good Companies 64 (June 2012): 274-278; Todorovic, Zelimir William and Marietta Wolczacka Frye. “Writing Effective Executive Summaries: An Interdisciplinary Examination.” In United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Conference Proceedings . (Decatur, IL: United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 2009): pp. 662-691.

• << Previous: 3. The Abstract
• Next: 4. The Introduction >>
• Last Updated: Sep 4, 2024 9:40 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• 20th Century: Post-1945
• 20th Century: Pre-1945
• African American History
• Antebellum History
• Asian American History
• Civil War and Reconstruction
• Colonial History
• Cultural History
• Early National History
• Economic History
• Environmental History
• Foreign Relations and Foreign Policy
• History of Science and Technology
• Labor and Working Class History
• Late 19th-Century History
• Latino History
• Legal History
• Native American History
• Political History
• Pre-Contact History
• Religious History
• Revolutionary History
• Slavery and Abolition
• Southern History
• Urban History
• Western History
• Women's History
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

The city beautiful movement, 1890–1920.

• John D. Fairfield John D. Fairfield Department of History, Xavier University
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.013.558
• Published online: 26 April 2018

The City Beautiful movement arose in the 1890s in response to the accumulating dirt and disorder in industrial cities, which threatened economic efficiency and social peace. City Beautiful advocates believed that better sanitation, improved circulation of traffic, monumental civic centers, parks, parkways, public spaces, civic art, and the reduction of outdoor advertising would make cities throughout the United States more profitable and harmonious. Engaging architects and planners, businessmen and professionals, and social reformers and journalists, the City Beautiful movement expressed a boosterish desire for landscape beauty and civic grandeur, but also raised aspirations for a more humane and functional city. “Mean streets make mean people,” wrote the movement’s publicist and leading theorist, Charles Mulford Robinson, encapsulating the belief in positive environmentalism that drove the movement. Combining the parks and boulevards of landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted with the neoclassical architecture of Daniel H. Burnham’s White City at the Chicago’s World Columbian Exposition in 1893, the City Beautiful movement also encouraged a view of the metropolis as a delicate organism that could be improved by bold, comprehensive planning. Two organizations, the American Park and Outdoor Art Association (founded in 1897) and the American League for Civic Improvements (founded in 1900), provided the movement with a national presence. But the movement also depended on the work of civic-minded women and men in nearly 2,500 municipal improvement associations scattered across the nation. Reaching its zenith in Burnham’s remaking of Washington, D.C., and his coauthored Plan of Chicago (1909), the movement slowly declined in favor of the “City Efficient” and a more technocratic city-planning profession. Aside from a legacy of still-treasured urban spaces and structures, the City Beautiful movement contributed to a range of urban reforms, from civic education and municipal housekeeping to city planning and regionalism.

• city planning
• municipal reform
• urban beautification
• public sculpture
• World’s Columbian Exposition
• urban aesthetics
• Frederick Law Olmsted
• Daniel H. Burnham
• Charles Mulford Robinson

You do not currently have access to this article

Please login to access the full content.

Access to the full content requires a subscription

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, American History. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 06 September 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [185.80.151.41]
• 185.80.151.41

Character limit 500 /500

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Active funding opportunity

Nsf 24-510: collaborative research in computational neuroscience (crcns), program solicitation, document information, document history.

• Posted: December 11, 2023
• Replaces: NSF 20-609

Program Solicitation NSF 24-510

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

Deadline for FY 2024 competition

Deadline for FY 2025 competition

Deadline for FY 2026 competition

Important Information And Revision Notes

This solicitation extends the Collaborative Research in Computational Neuroscience program for three years, with the following modifications:

• The introduction and program description, including the description of scientific topics and approaches, have been updated in Sections I and II of this solicitation;
• Cloud computing and high-throughput computing resources may be requested for new proposals and for active awards;
• Agency contacts, agency-specific instructions, and allowable multilateral proposals have been updated in Section VIII of this solicitation;
• Information on Results from Prior Support is required for each PI or co-PI who has received funding from any of the CRCNS participating funding organizations within the past five years; note that sharing of data, software, and/or other resources under prior support must be addressed;
• Letters of collaboration must conform to the format described in Section V.A. of this solicitation;
• Proposers are advised to review agency-specific budget limitations described in Sections III and VIII of this solicitation. Proposals with budget requests exceeding applicable limits may be returned without review; and
• A proposal preparation checklist, supplementing the checklist provided in the PAPPG, is provided at the end of Section V.A. of this solicitation.

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted. The NSF PAPPG is regularly revised and it is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets the requirements specified in this solicitation and the applicable version of the PAPPG. Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.

Summary Of Program Requirements

General information.

Program Title:

Collaborative Research in Computational Neuroscience (CRCNS) Innovative Approaches to Science and Engineering Research on Brain Function

Computational neuroscience provides a theoretical foundation and a rich set of technical approaches for understanding the nervous system at all levels, building on the theory, methods, and findings of computer science, neuroscience, and numerous other disciplines to accelerate the understanding of nervous system structure and function, mechanisms underlying nervous system disorders, and computational strategies used by the nervous system. Through the CRCNS program, the participating funding organizations support collaborative activities that span a broad spectrum of computational neuroscience research, as appropriate to the missions and strategic objectives of each agency. Two classes of proposals will be considered in response to this solicitation: Research Proposals describing collaborative research projects, and Data Sharing Proposals to support sharing of data and other resources. Domestic and international projects will be considered, including proposals seeking parallel international funding. As detailed in the solicitation, opportunities for parallel funding are available for bilateral US-German, US-French, US-Israeli, US-Japanese, and US-Spanish projects, and multilateral projects involving the United States and two or more CRCNS partner countries (see Section VIII of the solicitation for country-specific limitations). Collaborating PIs from outside of the United States are referred to Section VIII of this solicitation for further instructions from the appropriate partner funding agency. Questions concerning a particular project's focus, direction, and relevance to a participating funding organization should be addressed to the appropriate person in the list of agency contacts in Section VIII of the solicitation. NSF will coordinate and manage the review of proposals jointly with participating domestic and foreign funding organizations, through a joint panel review process used by all participating funders. Additional information is provided in Section VI of the solicitation.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

Kenneth Whang, CRCNS Program Coordinator - NSF; Program Director, Division of Information and Intelligent Systems, National Science Foundation, telephone: (703) 292-5149, fax: (703) 292-9073, email: [email protected]

Heather Carroll, CRCNS Administrative Coordinator - NSF; Program Assistant, Division of Information and Intelligent Systems, National Science Foundation, telephone: (703) 292-8475, fax: (703) 292-9073, email: [email protected]

• 47.041 --- Engineering
• 47.049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences
• 47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
• 47.074 --- Biological Sciences
• 47.075 --- Social Behavioral and Economic Sciences
• 47.079 --- Office of International Science and Engineering
• 81.049 --- Office of Science Financial Assistance Program
• 93.173 --- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
• 93.213 --- National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health
• 93.242 --- National Institute of Mental Health
• 93.273 --- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
• 93.279 --- National Institute on Drug Abuse
• 93.286 --- National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
• 93.853 --- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
• 93.865 --- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
• 93.866 --- National Institute on Aging
• 93.867 --- National Eye Institute

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant

Estimated Number of Awards: 20 to 30

Anticipated Funding Amount: $5,000,000 to $30,000,000

per year, subject to availability of funds

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus. Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research laboratories, professional societies and similar organizations located in the U.S. that are directly associated with educational or research activities. For-profit organizations: U.S.-based commercial organizations, including small businesses, with strong capabilities in scientific or engineering research or education and a passion for innovation. U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratories are eligible to submit proposals in response to this solicitation.

Who May Serve as PI:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 2

In response to this solicitation, an investigator may participate as PI or co-PI in no more than two proposals per review cycle. In the event that a PI or co-PI does appear in either of these roles on more than two proposals, all proposals that include that person as a PI or co-PI will be returned without review. This limit applies to all PIs and co-PIs, based inside or outside of the United States.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. proposal preparation instructions.

• Letters of Intent: Not required
• Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required

Full Proposals:

• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) guidelines apply. The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .
• Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide ).

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing Requirements:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

Not Applicable

Other Budgetary Limitations:

Other budgetary limitations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

C. Due Dates

Proposal review information criteria.

Merit Review Criteria:

National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review criteria apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:

Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Reporting Requirements:

Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

I. Introduction

Computational neuroscience provides a theoretical foundation and a rich set of technical approaches for understanding the principles and dynamics of the nervous system at all levels. Building on the theory, methods, and findings of computer science, neuroscience, biology, the mathematical and physical sciences, the social and behavioral sciences, engineering, and other fields, computational neuroscience embraces a wide range of innovative approaches to accelerate the understanding of nervous system structure and function, mechanisms underlying nervous system disorders, and computational strategies used by the nervous system.

Furthering these advances, collaboration plays a pivotal role. Collaborative research enables investigators with complementary experience and training, and deep understanding of multiple scholarly fields, to tackle otherwise intractable scientific and technical challenges. Close collaborations enable dynamic development and refinement of models, theories, and analytical or experimental methods, and in-depth interdisciplinary exchange and training. Sharing of data, models, software, and other resources facilitates collaboration at a larger scale, enabling integration and re-use of data and code, development and training of models, rigorous evaluation of models and methods, and alignment of efforts across research communities. International collaborations offer unique opportunities to further expand research perspectives and partnerships, and to develop a community of globally engaged scientists and engineers.

Through the Collaborative Research in Computational Neuroscience (CRCNS) program, the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and Department of Energy (DOE); the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, BMBF); the French National Research Agency (Agence Nationale de la Recherche, ANR); the United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF); Japan’s National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NICT); and the Spanish State Research Agency (Agencia Estatal de Investigación, AEI) support collaborative activities spanning a broad spectrum of computational neuroscience research, as appropriate to the missions and strategic objectives of each agency. The participating funding organizations have released parallel documents with further agency-specific information, referenced in Section VIII of this solicitation.

II. Program Description

Following from the above motivations, two classes of proposals will be considered in response to this solicitation: Research Proposals describing collaborative research projects, and Data Sharing Proposals to support sharing of data and other resources. Domestic and international projects will be considered, including proposals seeking parallel international funding as detailed in Sections V.A. and VIII of this solicitation.

Research Proposals should describe innovative, collaborative projects focused on challenging interdisciplinary problems in computational neuroscience. The scope of computational neuroscience is defined inclusively, encompassing structure, function, organization, and computation across all levels of the nervous system, and including theory, modeling, and analysis, disease and normal function, and implications for biological as well as engineered systems.

Collaborative efforts are required. No particular combination of disciplinary backgrounds or scientific approaches is prescribed. Proposers should determine and convincingly demonstrate the complementary expertise and close collaborations needed to make significant interdisciplinary advances.

Examples of potential approaches and topics are given at the end of this section. Proposals selected for funding by this program must be responsive to the mission of a participating funding organization. Questions concerning a particular project's focus, direction, and relevance to a participating funding organization should be addressed to the appropriate person in the list of agency contacts in Section VIII of this solicitation.

Data Sharing Proposals should focus on the preparation and deployment of data, software, code bases, stimuli, models, or other resources in a manner that will enable wide-ranging research advances in computational neuroscience. Data sharing projects are expected to respond to the needs of an identified broad community of researchers, representing any of the scientific areas that would be appropriate for Research Proposals under this solicitation. The major innovation of a data sharing project could relate to the breadth, depth, or importance of the resources being shared. Technical innovations and novel approaches to community development and continuous improvement are encouraged as needed to maximize the effectiveness and impact of shared resources.

Support for data sharing under this solicitation focuses primarily on data and other resources, not more general infrastructure development, or research to acquire the data. Proposers of data sharing projects are strongly encouraged to build on existing facilities and services where possible. A significant data sharing effort may also be proposed as a major component of a Research Proposal. All CRCNS investigators are encouraged to coordinate with other data sharing projects and related activities, including national and international efforts to develop sustainable, extensible neuroscience resources.

Innovative educational and training opportunities are strongly encouraged in all CRCNS proposals to develop research capacity in computational neuroscience, broaden participation in research and education, and increase the impact of computational neuroscience research. Activities at all levels of educational and career development are welcome under this solicitation. International research experiences for students and early-career researchers, described in terms of explicit plans and goals, are strongly encouraged in all projects involving international collaborations.

A broad range of approaches and topics is welcome under this solicitation. The list of examples below illustrates some areas of research that are appropriate under this solicitation. The following list is not intended to be exhaustive or exclusive :

• Explanatory, predictive, and informative models and simulations of normal and abnormal structures and functions of the nervous system and related disorders;
• Mathematical, statistical, and other quantitative analyses of research related to genetic, epigenetic, molecular, sub-cellular, cellular, network, systems, behavioral, and/or cognitive neuroscience;
• Theoretical and computational approaches to delineate and understand the structures and functions of neural circuits and networks;
• High-Performance Computing (HPC) enabled modeling and simulation approaches for extreme-scale research and understanding;
• Theoretical and computational approaches that relate nervous system processes to learning algorithms and architectures, probabilistic representations, estimation, prediction, information theory, and inference;
• Data-driven and informatics-based approaches that exploit large-scale, high-throughput, heterogeneous, and/or complex data;
• Theory and algorithms for designing experiments and integrating and analyzing data related to imaging, electrophysiological, optogenetic, multi-omic, and other methods;
• Artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) approaches that provide new insights into neural data, neural systems, and behavior, and neuroscience that can inform AI/ML;
• Methods combining AI/ML, statistics, dynamical systems, and/or control theory;
• Modeling approaches that efficiently assimilate new information, apply existing knowledge to new data, or optimize new data acquisition or closed-loop system performance;
• Computational strategies for human neuroscience that reduce model bias towards underrepresented groups and improve data coverage, access, equity, and fairness;
• Computational models examining the mechanisms whereby social determinants of health interact with biological factors, including genetics, to influence risk or resilience for diseases in the nervous system;
• Methods for measuring and analyzing connectivity, dynamics, information, and causation in neural systems;
• Integration and modeling of data across levels of analysis, from molecular to circuit level mechanisms implicated with behavior;
• Explanatory models of spatiotemporal brain dynamics across multiple scales;
• Approaches that integrate neural and cognitive models;
• Data-intensive approaches to modeling and analysis, and integrated theory- and data-driven models at different levels of abstraction;
• Theoretical and computational methods that can be applied to: common pathways, circuits, and mechanisms underlying multiple diseases in the nervous system; integrating brain measures across levels of analysis; and translational research; and
• Computational approaches in translational research aimed at addressing one or more phases (e.g., target identification) of drug discovery for nervous system disorders, including mechanistic neurobiological models of drug target engagement.

Examples of topics amenable to these approaches include but are not limited to the following:

• Neurodevelopment, neurodegeneration, neuroinflammation and repair;
• Pattern recognition and perception, learning, representation, and encoding;
• Motor control mechanisms and sensorimotor integration;
• Memory and attention;
• Cognitive and decision-making functions and dysfunction (including, e.g., impulse control and disinhibition, and addiction, broadly construed);
• Neural origins of risk and time preference;
• Judgment, choice formation, and social-behavioral phenomena such as trust, competitiveness, and cooperation, including the role of emotion;
• Language and communication;
• Intellectual and developmental disabilities;
• Neural interface decoding and analysis, control, and modeling of processes affecting neural interfaces and neuroprostheses;
• Application of knowledge of brain computation to devices;
• Normal and abnormal sensory processing (vision, audition, olfaction, taste, balance, proprioception, and somatic sensation);
• Neural mechanisms of adaptation to environmental constraints or disease;
• Neurological, neuromuscular, and neurovascular disorders;
• Mental health, mental illness, and related disorders;
• Alcohol and substance use disorders, including their interaction with eating disorders and other psychiatric and neurological disorders, and the effects of these conditions on cognitive processes;
• Emergent and state-space properties of dynamic neural networks and ensembles; and
• Modulation of central and/or peripheral neural processes by complementary and integrative health approaches.

Cloud Computing and High-Throughput Computing Resources (for new proposals and for active funded awards): Many CRCNS projects face data- and computationally-intensive challenges that may benefit from accessing cloud computing or high-throughput computing resources, which provide robust, agile, reliable, and scalable infrastructure. The Cloud Access Program (NSF) and the STRIDES Initiative (NIH) have established partnerships with commercial cloud service providers to provide awardees with cost-effective, flexible access to cloud-based resources. The Partnership to Advance Throughput Computing ( PATh ) facilitates access to distributed high throughput computing technologies and services. The US PIs of new proposals or active funded awards may request these resources according to the instructions at the end of Section V.A. of this solicitation.

Community Input: The participating funders encourage interdisciplinary, community-driven efforts to map out new frontiers at the interface of neuroscience and other disciplines that could reshape brain research and its applications. Inquiries regarding potential workshops, synthesis papers, or similar activities may be sent to [email protected] and/or the agency contacts listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.

III. Award Information

It is anticipated that a minimum of $5 million will be available each year for this competition, with potentially $20 to $30 million annually, depending on the quality of proposals and availability of funds.

Award sizes for CRCNS projects (including all CRCNS-funded project components, inside and outside of the United States) have typically ranged from approximately $100,000 to $250,000 (USD) per year in direct costs, with durations of three to five years. Proposers contemplating projects with higher budget requirements (e.g., multilateral projects) are advised to consult in advance with the CRCNS Program Coordinator-NSF.

Additional agency-specific limitations, including maximum award budgets and durations , are described in Section VIII of this solicitation. All proposers are advised to review the additional limitations that apply to projects funded by the U.S. Department of Energy and National Institutes of Health and, if applicable, funding limitations specified by other national funding organizations from which parallel funding is requested. Proposals with budget requests exceeding applicable limits may be returned without review.

Estimated program budget, number of awards, and average award size and duration are subject to the availability of funds.

Upon conclusion of the review process, meritorious research proposals may be recommended for funding by one or more of the participating funding organizations, at the option of the funders, not the proposer. Subsequent grant administration procedures will be in accordance with the individual policies of the awarding agency.

Further information about agency processes and agency-specific award information is provided in Section VI.B. and Section VIII of this solicitation.

IV. Eligibility Information

Additional Eligibility Info:

Proposal Limit: Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation may not duplicate or be substantially similar to other proposals concurrently under consideration by other programs or study sections of the participating agencies. Duplicate or substantially similar proposals will be returned without review.

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions

Full Proposal Preparation Instructions : Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Research.gov or Grants.gov.

• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg . Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] . The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number.
• Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov . The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: ( https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide ). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, please note the following:

Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via Research.gov. PAPPG Chapter II.E.3 provides additional information on collaborative proposals.

See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions.

The following information supplements the PAPPG and the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation should be prepared according to the general guidelines contained in the PAPPG, as modified by the following additional specific instructions for Research Proposals or Data Sharing Proposals . Additional instructions for International Proposals Seeking Parallel Funding apply only to proposals for projects involving collaborations among organizations in the United States and organizations in other countries, to be funded in parallel by participating agencies of the corresponding countries. Proposals involving other types of international collaboration may also be submitted, for consideration under standard U.S. funding mechanisms. Proposers are advised to discuss such projects with the appropriate agency contact(s) before submitting. The instructions for specific classes of proposals are cumulative, as indicated in the table below:

Research Proposals

The following additional instructions apply to all Research Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation. If the proposal seeks parallel funding for an international collaboration, please also refer to the instructions below for International Proposals Seeking Parallel Funding.

• Title: Titles for research proposals should begin with the phrase, “CRCNS Research Proposal:” Additional title prefixes (e.g., “Collaborative Research:” or “RUI:”) may be included as applicable. Although all CRCNS Research Proposals must describe scientific collaborations involving two or more investigators, they do not need to be collaborative proposals in the administrative sense, i.e., separately submitted proposals from multiple organizations seeking US funding on a unified project. (See PAPPG Chapter II.E.3. for more information.)
• Project Summary: The project summary should convey both the interdisciplinary problem(s) of interest and the methods to be employed. For projects with medical relevance, the statement on broader impacts should include a summary of the project's potential contributions to understanding, preventing, and managing disease, and enhancing public health. Proposers requesting cloud computing and/or high-throughput computing resources as part of the proposal should include the keyword “CloudAccess” and/or “HTCAccess” (one word without space) at the end of the Overview section (before the section on Intellectual Merit).
• Project Description: In addition to the guidance specified in the PAPPG, including the requirement for a separate section labeled “Broader Impacts,” Project Descriptions for research projects must include a Coordination Plan. Up to two additional pages are permitted in the Project Description for this purpose only, allowing a maximum of 17 pages total. The Coordination Plan must include: 1) the specific roles of the collaborating PIs, co-PIs, other Senior Personnel and paid consultants at all organizations involved; 2) how the project will be managed across organizations and disciplines; 3) identification of the specific coordination mechanisms that will enable cross-organization and/or cross-discipline scientific integration (e.g., workshops, graduate student exchange, project meetings at conferences, communication tools, software repositories, etc.), and 4) specific references to the budget line items that support these coordination mechanisms. Information on Results from Prior Support is required for each PI or co-PI identified on the project who has received funding from any of the CRCNS participating funding organizations with an end date in the past five years, or any current funding, including no-cost extensions. Sharing of data, software, and/or other resources under prior support must be addressed. In cases where the PI or any co-PI has received more than one award (excluding amendments to existing awards), they need only report on the one award that is most closely related to the proposal. For recipients of BSF funding, the prior reporting requirement applies only to funding through NSF-BSF joint programs, not the BSF regular research programs. If the Project Description, excluding the Coordination Plan, exceeds 15 pages, or is missing required information on Results from Prior Support, the proposal will be returned without review.
• Supplementary Documents: Supplementary documents are limited to the specific types of documentation listed in the PAPPG or other applicable solicitation guidance (e.g., Facilitating Research at Primarily Undergraduate Institutions ), with the following exceptions:

Human Subjects Protection. Proposals involving human subjects should include a supplementary document, no more than two pages in length, summarizing potential risks to human subjects; plans for recruitment and informed consent; inclusion of women, minorities, and children; and planned procedures to protect against or minimize potential risks. Only one Human Subjects Protection document, covering all collaborative components of the project within the two-page limit, may be submitted per project. Vertebrate Animals. Proposals involving vertebrate animals should include a supplementary document, no more than two pages in length, that addresses the following points: Detailed description of the proposed use of the animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and number to be used; Justification for the use of animals, choice of species, and numbers to be used; Description of procedures for minimizing discomfort, distress, pain, and injury; and Method of euthanasia and the reasons for its selection. Only one Vertebrate Animals document, covering all collaborative components of the project within the two-page limit, may be submitted per project. Data Management Plan. All proposals must include a supplementary document on data management as specified in the PAPPG and CISE Guidance for Data Management Plans ( https://www.nsf.gov/cise/cise_dmp.jsp ). As needed, the Data Management Plan should also address possible differences between U.S. and applicable non-U.S. data protection requirements. Only one Data Management Plan, covering all collaborative components of the project within the two-page limit, may be submitted per project. Costs associated with Data Management Plans (e.g., for making data accessible and reusable for other researchers) may be included in the proposal budget. Letters of Collaboration. Letters to document collaborative arrangements are limited to stating the intent to collaborate and may not contain endorsements or evaluation of the proposed project . These letters must conform to the following format: “If the proposal submitted by Dr. [insert the full name of the Principal Investigator] entitled [insert the proposal title] is selected for funding, it is my intent to [describe tasks and/or resource commitments in 20 words or fewer] as detailed in the Project Description or the Facilities, Equipment or Other Resources section of the proposal.”

Cloud Computing and High-Throughput Computing Resources. Proposals requesting cloud computing and/or high-throughput computing (HTC) resources should include a supplementary document, no more than two pages in length, that includes the following information:

• (1) the title of the proposal and name(s) of the US PI(s) and institution(s) requesting the resources;
• (2) a technical description and justification for the requested cloud computing and/or HTC resources;
• (3) for cloud computing requests, specific cloud computing providers that will be used;
• (4) for HTC requests, information regarding (a) the expected number of self-contained tasks per ensemble – note that each task can be packaged into one or more batch job; (b) the resource requirements for each task type in the ensemble – for example, requirements for cores, memory, wall-time, and scratch space; (c) the expected number of ensembles; (d) the expected input and output data requirements for each task type; and (e) the expected number and size of shared input files within an ensemble – expected number of times each file is read per ensemble; and
• (5) the anticipated annual and total costs for accessing the desired cloud computing and/or HTC resources. This cost should not be included in the NSF proposal budget.

PIs may refer to the CloudBank or STRIDES websites for information on estimating the budget for cloud computing resources. PIs may refer to the PATh website or contact [email protected] with questions about HTC resources, using HTC, or estimating credit needs.

The NSF proposal budget should not include the anticipated cost of accessing these resources; that should be reflected in item (5) of the supplementary document. Proposers should include the keyword “CloudAccess” and/or “HTCAccess” (one word without space) at the end of the Overview section (before the section on Intellectual Merit) of the Project Summary.

Proposals containing special information or supplementary documentation that has not been explicitly allowed above, such as article reprints or preprints, or appendices, will be returned without review.

Data Sharing Proposals

The following additional instructions apply to all Data Sharing Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation. If the proposal seeks parallel funding for an international collaboration, please also refer to the further instructions below for International Proposals Seeking Parallel Funding.

• Title: Titles for data sharing proposals should begin with the phrase, “CRCNS Data Sharing Proposal:” Additional title prefixes (e.g., “Collaborative Research:” or “RUI:”) may be included as applicable. (See PAPPG Chapter II.E.3. for more information about collaborative proposals.)
• Project Summary: As with Research Proposals, the statement on broader impacts should address medical relevance if appropriate, and the keyword “CloudAccess” and/or “HTCAccess” should be used to indicate a request for cloud computing and/or high-throughput computing resources as part of the proposal.
• Project Description: In addition to the guidance specified in the PAPPG, including the requirement for a separate section labeled “Broader Impacts,” Project Descriptions for Data Sharing Proposals should address the following points:

Description and significance of the data, software, code bases, stimuli, models, or other resources, including their quality, scientific importance, structure, format, and scale; Relationship to similar data or other resources, relevant standards, coordination with relevant related activities and infrastructure, and potential for integration with other resources; Anticipated range of uses for research and education in computational neuroscience or other fields; Plan for preparation and deployment, including technical plans, metadata and documentation, and plans for outreach and community input; and Anticipated implementation timetable and strategy for evaluation and management over the course of the award period. For proposals involving multiple collaborators, organizations, or collaborating contributors, a Coordination Plan, as described above for Research Proposals, is allowed but not required. As with Research Proposals, up to two additional pages are permitted in the Project Description for the Coordination Plan, for a maximum of 17 pages total. Information on Results from Prior Support – including sharing of data, software, and/or other resources under prior support – must be included for each PI or co-PI identified on the project who has received funding from any of the CRCNS participating funding organizations with an end date in the past five years, or any current funding, including no-cost extensions. For recipients of BSF funding, the prior reporting requirement applies only to funding through NSF-BSF joint programs, not the BSF regular research programs. If the Project Description, excluding the Coordination Plan, exceeds 15 pages, or is missing required information on Results from Prior Support, the proposal will be returned without review.

• Supplementary Documents: Data management issues are integral to data sharing projects and should be addressed within the project description; the required Data Management Plan supplementary document may refer the reader to the project description. Proposals should include a supplementary document on Human Subjects Protection , as described above for Research Proposals, if sharing of the data or other resources raises potential human subjects issues (e.g., confidentiality). Letters of Collaboration must conform to the format described above for Research Proposals. Other supplementary documents, as described above for Research Proposals, may be included as applicable.

Proposals containing special information or supplementary documentation that has not been explicitly allowed in the PAPPG or this solicitation, such as article reprints or preprints, or appendices, will be returned without review.

International Proposals Seeking Parallel Funding

The following special instructions apply to proposals for projects involving bilateral or multilateral collaborations among organizations in the United States and organizations in other countries, to be funded in parallel by participating agencies of the corresponding countries. US investigators should prepare a proposal according to the instructions below. Collaborating PIs from outside of the United States are referred to Section VIII of this solicitation for further instructions from the appropriate partner funding agency. Non-US partners seeking parallel funding from partner agencies should not request funding in the US budget: they should not request subawards from the US proposer, nor should they submit a lead or non-lead collaborative proposal to NSF.

• A proposal to NSF should be prepared according to the guidelines above for Research Proposals or Data Sharing Proposals, as appropriate, except as follows. Proposal titles should begin with “CRCNS” followed by a phrase describing the countries involved and the type of proposal, such as “CRCNS US-German Research Proposal:” The countries and proposal types that will be considered for parallel funding are described in Section VIII of this solicitation. The NSF proposal should be submitted by the US partner in the collaboration. The NSF proposal should describe the combined collaborative activities, across all participating countries and investigators, as a unified project.
• The collaborating PIs, co-PIs, and senior personnel, from all participating countries , must be listed in full at the top of the first page of the Project Description, along with their departmental and organizational affiliations. The NSF Cover Sheet and biographical sketches will include only the investigators affiliated with US organizations. Biographical sketches for PIs, co-PIs, and senior personnel from outside of the United States must be included as supplementary documents in the NSF proposal. They do not need to be in NSF-approved format so long as they are consistent with the length and content requirements specified in the PAPPG.
• All International Proposals Seeking Parallel Funding must include a Coordination Plan, which should include specific plans for exchange of students and researchers, including timing, duration, and logistical arrangements for visits, and roles of specific project personnel. NSF specifically encourages US students and early-career researchers to spend substantive time abroad collaborating with researchers in foreign organizations. (As with domestic proposals, up to two additional pages are permitted in the Project Description for the Coordination Plan, for a maximum of 17 pages total. If the Project Description, excluding the Coordination Plan, exceeds 15 pages, or is missing required information on Results from Prior Support, the proposal will be returned without review. )
• The NSF budget pages (in US Dollars) should not include any of the costs of components of the project outside of the United States that are to be funded by partner agencies. Budgets for the non-US components of the project (in the currencies used by the partner agencies) must be prepared according to the instructions of partner agencies, referenced in Section VIII of this solicitation, and included as a supplementary document in the NSF proposal. The range of award sizes described in Section III of this solicitation applies to the combined direct costs of the full project (summed over all CRCNS-funded components of the project, inside and outside of the United States).
• Statements of current and pending support for investigators outside of the United States; and statements of their facilities, equipment, and other resources should be submitted as supplementary documents in the NSF proposal. They do not need to be in NSF-approved format so long as they are consistent with the length and content requirements specified in the PAPPG.
• Supplementary documents pursuant to Data Management Plans and, as needed, Postdoctoral Mentoring Plans, Human Subjects Protection, and Vertebrate Animals, should cover all components of the collaborative project, inside and outside of the United States. No more than one document of each of these types may be submitted per collaborative project. Page limits for these documents are specified above and in the PAPPG.
• Information on Collaborators & Other Affiliations for PIs, co-PIs, and senior personnel from outside of the United States should be submitted under Additional Single Copy Documents .

Cloud Computing and High-Throughput Computing Resources (for active funded awards)

US PIs of active funded CRCNS awards are eligible to request cloud computing and/or high-throughput computing (HTC) resources in support of their funded projects as follows:

• NSF- and NIH-funded PIs may request cloud computing resources to use public clouds such as Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud Platform, IBM Cloud, and Microsoft Azure. NSF-funded PIs may apply for cloud computing resources via CloudBank, an external cloud access entity supported by NSF’s Cloud Access program. NIH-funded PIs may apply for resources via STRIDES, an initiative of the NIH Office of Data Science Strategy (ODSS), part of a plan for implementing the NIH Strategic Plan for Data Science.
• All US PIs (funded by NSF, NIH, or DOE) may request HTC resources through the Partnership to Advance Throughput Computing (PATh) project supported by NSF. HTC supports the automated execution of workloads that consist of large ensembles of self-contained inter-dependent tasks that may require large amounts of computing power over long periods of time to complete. Available resources include large-scale compute and GPU servers and nearline storage, as described further on the PATh credit accounts web page.

NSF- or NIH-funded PIs requesting cloud computing resources should contact the NSF or NIH cognizant program officer of their CRCNS project by e-mail with a description of their cloud computing request. The description should include, in no more than two pages, items (1), (2), (3), and (5) as described above for the Cloud Computing and High-Throughput Computing Resources supplementary document. Please include “CRCNS CloudAccess” and the NSF award number, or “CRCNS STRIDES” and the NIH award number, in the e-mail subject line. Cloud computing requests will be internally reviewed. As appropriate, the PI(s) will be contacted with further instructions on how to submit an administrative action on their NSF award to access CloudBank, or how to request an administrative supplement to their NIH award for STRIDES.

PIs requesting HTC resources should contact the NSF, NIH, or DOE cognizant program officer of their CRCNS project by e-mail with a description of their HTC request. The description should include, in no more than two pages, items (1), (2), (4), and (5) as described above for the Cloud Computing and High-Throughput Computing Resources supplementary document. Please include “CRCNS HTCAccess” and the award number for the funded project in the e-mail subject line. HTC resource requests will be internally reviewed. NSF will work directly with PATh to provision credits for approved requests.

Proposal Preparation Checklist

Prior to submission, applicants are strongly encouraged to review the proposal preparation checklist provided in the PAPPG, Exhibit II-1, as well as the following list of items specific to the CRCNS program:

[ ] General:

• [ ] The proposal is not a duplicate of, or substantially similar to, a proposal concurrently under consideration by other programs or study sections of the participating agencies.

[ ] Cover Sheet:

• [ ] Proposal title includes “CRCNS Research Proposal:” or “CRCNS Data Sharing Proposal:” or, for International Proposals Seeking Parallel Funding, a similar prefix identifying the countries involved and the type of proposal, such as “CRCNS US-German Research Proposal:”
• [ ] Collaborative proposal status reflects whether or not two or more organizations are seeking US funding to collaborate on a unified project.

[ ] Project Summary:

• [ ] The statement on broader impacts addresses medical relevance if appropriate.
• [ ] Proposers seeking cloud computing and/or high-throughput computing resources include the keyword “CloudAccess” and/or “HTCAccess” (one word without space) at the end of the Overview section (before the section on Intellectual Merit).

[ ] Project Description:

• [ ] The Project Description, excluding the Coordination Plan of up to two additional pages, does not exceed 15 pages.
• [ ] Results of prior support are included for all applicable PIs and co-PIs, and address sharing of data, software, and/or other resources under prior support .

[ ] Proposal Budget:

• [ ] The requested budget does not exceed the applicable limits described in Section VIII of this solicitation.
• [ ] For International Proposals Seeking Parallel Funding, the NSF budget pages do not include any of the costs of components of the project outside of the United States that are to be funded by partner agencies.

[ ] Special Information and Supplementary Documentation:

• [ ] For International Projects Seeking Parallel Funding, budgets for any components of the project outside of the United States, to be funded by partner agencies, are included in supplementary documents, in the currencies and according to the instructions of the partner agencies.
• [ ] Biographical sketches for PIs, co-PIs, and senior personnel from outside of the United States are included as supplementary documents (if applicable).
• [ ] Letters of collaboration conform to the solicitation-prescribed format (if applicable).
• [ ] Proposals involving human subjects include a supplementary document, no more than two pages in length.
• [ ] Proposals involving vertebrate animals include a supplementary document, no more than two pages in length.
• [ ] Proposals requesting cloud computing or HTC resources include a supplementary document, no more than two pages in length.

Cost Sharing:

Budgets should include travel funds for the PI to attend an annual CRCNS Principal Investigators' meeting.

D. Research.gov/Grants.gov Requirements

For Proposals Submitted Via Research.gov:

To prepare and submit a proposal via Research.gov, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www.research.gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission.html . For Research.gov user support, call the Research.gov Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected] . The Research.gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the Research.gov system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:

Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants.html . In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: [email protected] . The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.

Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to Research.gov for further processing.

The NSF Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov informational page provides submission guidance to applicants and links to helpful resources including the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide , Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov how-to guide , and Grants.gov Submitted Proposals Frequently Asked Questions . Grants.gov proposals must pass all NSF pre-check and post-check validations in order to be accepted by Research.gov at NSF.

When submitting via Grants.gov, NSF strongly recommends applicants initiate proposal submission at least five business days in advance of a deadline to allow adequate time to address NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p.m. submitting organization's local time on the deadline. Please note that some errors cannot be corrected in Grants.gov. Once a proposal passes pre-checks but fails any post-check, an applicant can only correct and submit the in-progress proposal in Research.gov.

Proposers that submitted via Research.gov may use Research.gov to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should be used to check the status of an application.

VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures

NSF will coordinate and manage the review of proposals jointly with participating domestic and foreign funding organizations, through a joint panel review process used by all participating funders. Relevant information about proposals and reviews of proposals will be shared between the participating organizations as appropriate. Further information on the processes and requirements of participating funding organizations is detailed in this Section and in Section VIII of this solicitation.

Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.

A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/ .

Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Leading the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Talent Development and the Delivery of Benefits from Research - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022 - 2026 . These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.

One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria

The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.

1. Merit Review Principles

These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:

• All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.
• NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.
• Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project.

With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.

These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

2. Merit Review Criteria

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(i). contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal.

When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:

• Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and
• Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:

• Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
• Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
• To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
• Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?
• How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?
• Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

For this solicitation, clinical and technological applications are specifically included among the societally relevant outcomes that could be related to a project's Broader Impacts, in addition to the potential outcomes listed above. An NIH Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives (PEDP) should not be submitted; however, specific plans for fostering diversity, inclusivity, and accessibility are strongly encouraged as part of the Broader Impacts section of the Project Description.

The following additional review criterion reflects this solicitation's central goal of enabling high-quality collaborative research.

Quality and value of collaboration Factors to be considered are as follows: Is the expertise of the proposers complementary and well-suited to the problems being addressed? Does the collaboration productively bring together new combinations of investigators? Are there new approaches or resources facilitated as a result of the collaboration? Are the specific roles of each collaborating investigator clear? Is the collaborative activity coordinated efficiently and effectively? To what extent will it contribute to the advancement of multiple collaborating disciplines? To what extent will it lead to the development of high-quality resources that will be useful to the research community at large? To what extent will it provide unique collaborative research experiences for participating students and early-career researchers?

For proposals involving international collaborations, reviewers will additionally consider: mutual benefits; true intellectual collaboration with the foreign partner(s); benefits to be realized from the expertise and specialized skills, facilities, sites, and/or resources of the international counterpart; and active research engagement of U.S. students and early-career researchers, where such individuals are engaged in the research.

NIH Review Criteria

The mission of the NIH is to seek fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce illness and disability. In their evaluations of Intellectual Merit , reviewers will be asked to consider the following criteria that are used by NIH:

Overall Impact. Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following five core review criteria, and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).

Significance. Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

Investigator(s). Are the PIs, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance, and organizational structure appropriate for the project?

Innovation. Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

Approach. Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?

If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

Environment. Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?

Where applicable, the following items will also be considered:

Protections for Human Subjects. For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.

For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials.

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Individuals Across the Lifespan. When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed.

Vertebrate Animals. The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of procedures involving animals including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information, see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/VASchecklist.pdf .

Biohazards. Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.

Budget and Period of Support. Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.

B. Review and Selection Process

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.

Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

NSF Process: Those proposals selected for funding by NSF will be handled in accordance with standard NSF procedures. After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF is striving to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval begins on the date of receipt. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation.

A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

In all cases, after programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.

NIH Process: For those proposals that are selected for potential funding by participating NIH Institutes or Centers, the PI will be required to resubmit the proposal in an NIH-approved format directly to the Center for Scientific Review ( http://www.csr.nih.gov/ ) of the NIH. PIs invited to resubmit to NIH will receive further information on resubmission procedures from NIH.

An applicant will not be allowed to increase the proposed budget or change the scientific content of the application in the resubmission to the NIH. NIH budgets may not exceed $250,000 in direct costs, and the total direct costs requested for all years may not exceed the total requested on the NSF application. However, in some cases, NIH Institutes may request that the budget request be reallocated across the years of the grant to conform to NIH modular budget practices. Indirect costs on any foreign subawards/subcontracts will be limited to eight (8) percent. Applicants will be expected to utilize the Multiple Principal Investigator option at the NIH ( http://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_PI/ ) as appropriate.

Proposals that are selected for potential funding by participating NIH Institutes or Centers will be subject to the NIH Data Management and Sharing policy ( NIH NOT-OD-21-013 , effective January 25, 2023) intended to promote the sharing of scientific data. Following the resubmission instructions provided by NIH, applicants planning research that results in the generation of scientific data will need to submit a Data Management and Sharing Plan, as described at https://sharing.nih.gov/data-management-and-sharing-policy . As outlined in the NIH Guide Notice Supplemental Policy Information: Allowable Costs for Data Management and Sharing ( NIH NOT-OD-21-015 ), investigators may request funds toward data management and sharing in the budget and budget justification sections of their applications.

These NIH applications will be entered into the NIH IMPAC II system. The results of the review will be presented to the involved Institutes' or Centers' National Advisory Councils for the second level of review. Subsequent to the Council reviews, NIH Institutes and Centers will make their funding determinations and selected awards will be made. Subsequent grant administration procedures for NIH awardees, including those related to New and Early Stage Investigators ( http://grants.nih.gov/grants/new_investigators/ ), will be in accordance with the policies of NIH. Applications selected for NIH funding will use the NIH R01 funding mechanism.

At the end of the project period, renewal applications for projects funded by the NIH are expected to be submitted directly to the NIH as Renewal Applications, rather than as proposals to the CRCNS program. Principal Investigators should contact their NIH Program Officer for additional information. For informational purposes, NIH Principal Investigators may wish to consult the NIH Grants and Funding web site ( https://grants.nih.gov/grants/about_grants.htm ), which provides excellent generic information about all aspects of NIH grantsmanship, including Renewal Applications.

DOE Process: For proposals that are selected for funding consideration by DOE, the DOE will ask and provide guidance to the applicant(s) to resubmit the proposal in a DOE-approved format directly to the DOE via the DOE Portfolio Analysis and Management System (PAMS) or Grants.gov. Each of these DOE applications will be accompanied by a cover letter that associates the application with CRCNS. Applicants will not be allowed to increase the proposed budget or change the scientific content of the application in the resubmission to the DOE unless approved or negotiated by the DOE.

BMBF Process: On the basis of the evaluation, suitable project ideas will be selected for funding. Successful applicants will be informed in writing of the result of the selection procedure.

In the second phase of the procedure, applicants whose applications have received a positive evaluation will be invited to present a formal application for funding. A decision will be made after a final evaluation. Forms for funding applications, guidelines, leaflets, information and auxiliary terms and conditions are available on the Internet at http://www.foerderportal.bund.de/ or can be obtained from the project management organization. Applicants are strongly advised to use the electronic application system "easy" to draft (project outlines and) formal applications ( http://www.foerderportal.bund.de/ ).

ANR Process: Taking into consideration the joint panel review recommendation outcome and consultation with the participating funding organizations, ANR will select the projects to be funded. ANR will inform the French applicants of the outcome of the selection through its usual online channel. The grant agreements of the selected projects will be issued in accordance with the ANR standard process and the call-specific funding regulations and requirements published on the ANR website.

BSF Process: BSF requires parallel submission of the proposal by the U.S. and Israeli PIs, according to its submission regulations and using an identical project description to that submitted to the NSF. However, BSF will not conduct an independent selection process, but rather will review the research programs selected for funding by the NSF and/or NIH and include Israeli PIs, and in most cases fund them if sufficient resources are available. BSF will notify all applicants of the results and online availability of the review material. BSF submission instructions can be found using the link: https://www.bsf.org.il/funding-opportunities/nsf-bsf-joint-research-grants/the-programs/

NICT Process: NICT and NSF will decide on projects to be selected after a consultation based on a proposal selection produced from the joint panel review. After this selection is officially approved by the NICT board of directors, NICT will inform Japanese applicants of the outcome. For successful applicants, a funding agreement will be entered in accordance with the standard NICT regulations on research funding.

AEI Process: Taking into consideration the joint panel review recommendation outcome and consultation with the participating funding organizations, AEI will select the projects that it wishes to fund. AEI will inform the Spanish applicants of the outcome of the selection. The national support to the Spanish parties will be implemented through the State Research Program Call on International Joint Programming R&D Projects [ Proyectos de I+D+I de Programación Conjunta Internacional (PCI) ]. Spanish researchers will abide by national rules according to the PCI call. The Granting Resolution ( Resolución Definitiva de Concesión ) formalizes the agreement between the AEI and the Spanish beneficiaries and for all intents and purposes this Resolution acts as a formal contract between the parties.

ISCIII Process: Applicants eligible for funding will be invited to present a formal application for funding to ISCIII. Forms for funding applications, guidelines, leaflets, information and auxiliary terms and conditions are available on the Internet at https://sede.isciii.gob.es . Applicants must use the electronic application system to draft (project outlines and) formal applications ( https://sede.isciii.gob.es ). ISCIII will select the project proposals that it wishes to fund taking into consideration the joint panel review recommendation final outcome of the evaluation and in consultation with the participating funding organizations. ISCIII will inform the applicants based in institutions located in Spain of the outcome of the selection procedure. After programmatic approval, the grant agreements of the selected projects will be issued in accordance with ISCIII standard funding regulations pursuant to the call of the Strategic Action for Health ( Acción Estrategica en Salud ).

VII. NSF Award Administration Information

A. notification of the award.

Notification of an NSF award is made to the submitting organization by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)

B. Award Conditions

An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.

*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF . Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

Administrative and National Policy Requirements

Build America, Buy America

As expressed in Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers (86 FR 7475), it is the policy of the executive branch to use terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards to maximize, consistent with law, the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.

Consistent with the requirements of the Build America, Buy America Act (Pub. L. 117-58, Division G, Title IX, Subtitle A, November 15, 2021), no funding made available through this funding opportunity may be obligated for an award unless all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in the project are produced in the United States. For additional information, visit NSF’s Build America, Buy America webpage.

Special Award Conditions:

Attribution of support in publications must acknowledge the joint program, as well as the funding organization and award number, by including a phrase such as, "as part of the NSF/NIH/DOE/ANR/BMBF/BSF/NICT/AEI Collaborative Research in Computational Neuroscience Program."

C. Reporting Requirements

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.

Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.

PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

VIII. Agency Contacts And Agency-specific Information

Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

For questions related to the use of NSF systems contact:

• NSF Help Desk: 1-800-381-1532
• Research.gov Help Desk e-mail: [email protected]

For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

• Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: [email protected] .

The Spanish Research Agency (AEI) will consider US-Spanish Research Proposals and US-Spanish Data Sharing Proposals submitted to NSF in response to this solicitation. All the information required for Spanish applicants to successfully submit a proposal can be found in the annex to this solicitation available on the AEI-MCIN webpage at https://www.aei.gob.es/noticias/anuncio-convocatoria-proyectos-bilaterales-estados-unidos-participacion-aei-marco . AEI strongly encourages Spanish applicants contact the national point of contact before the proposal is submitted.

In response to this solicitation, an investigator may participate as PI or co-PI in no more than one proposal involving Spain per review cycle. AEI recommends the signature of a consortium agreement covering financial and intellectual property issues as well as the management and delivery of project activities to all partners involved in bilateral or multilateral projects. Resulting scientific data not subject to intellectual property rights must comply with FAIR principles ( http://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18 ).

It is not necessary to submit a parallel proposal directly to AEI; nonetheless, a notification of submission should be sent, within one week following the NSF proposal deadline, to the national point of contact:

Esther Chacón, email: [email protected] or [email protected]

The French National Research Agency (ANR) will consider US-French Research Proposals and US-French Data Sharing Proposals, Multilateral Research Proposals, and Multilateral Data Sharing Proposals involving the United States and the partnering countries Israel and/or Japan, submitted to NSF in response to this solicitation. ANR will finance projects of maximum four years. The modalities of participation of the French applicants are presented in the annex to this solicitation available on the ANR website at ( https://anr.fr/crcns-2024 ). ANR requires the signature of a consortium agreement covering financial and intellectual property issues as well as the management and delivery of project activities. It is not necessary to submit a parallel full proposal to ANR; nonetheless, an annex for French Participants including a publishable lay summary of the project as well as a financial plan for the French partners should be submitted to NSF as supplementary material included in the proposal and in parallel sent to [email protected] within one week following the NSF proposal deadline .

ANR encourages researchers to contact EBRAINS infrastructure ( [email protected] ) to inquire about modalities for advanced computational resources.

The French applicants are strongly encouraged to contact ANR prior to submission:

Sheyla Mejia, Scientific Coordinator, Biology and Health Department, telephone: +33 1 7809 8014, email: [email protected]

Maurice Tia, Scientific Officer, Information and Communication Sciences and Technologies Department, telephone: +33 1 7273 0690, email: [email protected]

Germany's Federal Ministry of Education and Research will consider US-German Research Proposals and US-German Data Sharing Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation. The durations of these projects are expected to be no greater than three years. Investigators contemplating projects that would require longer durations are advised to discuss their project requirements with the appropriate agency contact(s) before submitting. Collaborating investigators in projects selected for funding that involve Germany will provide assurance to BMBF that a cooperation agreement, covering issues including intellectual property, has been established. It is not necessary to submit a parallel full proposal to BMBF; nonetheless, a financial plan for the German partners must be submitted to NSF as supplementary material included in the proposal . German applicants are referred to the BMBF Richtlinien ( https://www.gesundheitsforschung-bmbf.de/de/16749.php ) for further instructions, and are urged to contact the project management organization for advice on applications:

Katja Hüttner, DLR Projektträger für das BMBF, telephone: +49 228 3821 2177, email: [email protected] , web: http://www.dlr.de/pt

Sophia Schach, DLR Projektträger für das BMBF, telephone: +49 228 3821 1743, email: [email protected] , web: http://www.dlr.de/pt

The U.S.-Israel Binational Science Foundation will consider US-Israeli Research Proposals, US-Israeli Data Sharing Proposals, Multilateral Research Proposals, and Multilateral Data Sharing Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation. No more than five years of support may be requested. A proposal with the same project description as the proposal to NSF must be submitted by the Israeli PI to the BSF. The budget for the Israeli component of the project should be expressed in US Dollars. Submittal instructions are available at: https://www.bsf.org.il/funding-opportunities/nsf-bsf-joint-research-grants/the-programs/

Questions should be directed to:

Yael Dressler, telephone: +972-2-5828239, email: [email protected]

Rachel Haring, telephone: +972-2-5828239, email: [email protected]

DOE budgets may not exceed $400,000 per year in total costs (including direct and indirect costs) requested on the NSF application. The durations of these projects are expected to be no greater than three years.

Further questions may be directed to:

Robinson Pino, Program Manager, Office of Science, Advanced Scientific Computing Research, telephone: (301) 903-1263, email: [email protected]

Japan’s National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NICT) will consider US-Japanese Research Proposals, US-Japanese Data Sharing Proposals, and Multilateral Research and Data Sharing Proposals involving the United States and the partnering countries France and/or Israel, submitted in response to this solicitation. The durations of these projects are expected to be no greater than three years. In a supplementary document, investigators should provide assurance that an agreement covering issues such as intellectual property has been or will be established within a reasonable time after the notifications of awarded projects.

There are two types of US-Japanese projects: one is under NICT’s extramural Commissioned ICT Research and Development Program, and the other is under NICT’s intramural R&D funding program for NICT researchers. Projects may involve extramural or intramural Japanese investigators, but not both. A proposal with the same project description as the proposal to NSF must be submitted by the Japanese PI to NICT. Japanese applicants should refer to NICT’s solicitation (Japanese language only) for more information.

CRCNS is affiliated with the NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research ( http://neuroscienceblueprint.nih.gov/ ), and involves ten participating NIH Institutes and Centers. An NIH Notice ( NOT-MH-24-140 ) is being issued in parallel with this solicitation. Proposals are selected for potential NIH funding on the basis of the common CRCNS joint review process; resubmission of proposals directly to NIH is by invitation only. No NIH awards will exceed $250,000 per year in direct costs.

The CRCNS program supports human research projects such as observational studies and Basic Experimental Studies involving Humans ( BESH ), i.e., studies that meet both the definition of basic research and the NIH definition of a clinical trial . However, Phase I-IV clinical trials with clinical outcomes as the primary outcomes to assess efficacy will not be accepted. Please be aware of NIH’s definition of clinical trials , which has specific requirements for applicants proposing BESH studies. For research projects that 1) involve human subjects and 2) have public health relevance, applicants are strongly encouraged to contact Dr. Siavash Vaziri ( [email protected] ) prior to submitting an application to determine whether it could be supported by NIH through this program.

A search for “CRCNS” in the NIH RePORTER system ( https://reporter.nih.gov/ ) will show a list of CRCNS projects supported by NIH. Further questions may be directed to:

Siavash Vaziri (NIH Chair), Program Director, National Institute of Mental Health, telephone: (301) 443-1576, email: [email protected]

Wen Chen, Program Director, National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, telephone: (301) 451-3989, email: [email protected]

Amanda DiBattista, Program Director, Neurobiology of Aging and Neurodegeneration Branch, Division of Neuroscience, National Institute on Aging, telephone: (301) 496-9350, email: [email protected]

Qi Duan, Program Director, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, telephone: (301) 451-4780, email: [email protected]

Marie Gill, Program Specialist, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, telephone: (301) 451-1449, email: [email protected]

John A. Matochik, Program Director, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, telephone: (301) 451-7319, email: [email protected]

Brett Miller, Program Director, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, telephone: (301) 496-9849, email: [email protected]

Jessica Mollick, Program Officer, National Institute on Drug Abuse, telephone: (301) 827-2949, email: [email protected]

Leslie Osborne, Program Director, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, telephone: (301) 496-9964, email: [email protected]

Amy Poremba, Program Director, Central Pathways for Hearing and Balance, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, telephone: (301) 496-1804, email: [email protected]

Merav Sabri, Program Director, Central Processing of Taste and Smell, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, telephone: (301) 827-0908, email: [email protected]

Coryse St Hillaire-Clarke, Program Director, Sensory and Motor Disorders of Aging, Division of Neuroscience, National Institute on Aging, telephone: (301) 496-9350, email: [email protected]

Cheri Wiggs, Program Director, Division of Extramural Research, National Eye Institute, telephone: (301) 451-2020, email: [email protected]

A search in the NSF Award Search will show a list of CRCNS projects supported by NSF. Further questions for NSF program officers may be directed to:

Kenneth Whang, Program Director, Division of Information and Intelligent Systems, telephone: (703) 292-5149, fax: (703) 292-9073, email: [email protected]

Zhilan Feng, Program Director, Division of Mathematical Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7523, email: [email protected]

Dwight Kravitz, Program Director, Division of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-8740, email: [email protected]

Maija Kukla, Program Director, Office of International Science and Engineering, telephone: (703) 292-4940, email: [email protected]

Floh Thiels, Program Director, Division of Integrative Organismal Systems, telephone: (703) 292-8167, email: [email protected]

Steven Zehnder, Associate Program Director, Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems, telephone: (703) 292-7014, email: [email protected]

Lucy Zhang, Program Director, Division of Civil, Mechanical, and Manufacturing Innovation, telephone: (703) 292-5015, email: [email protected]

IX. Other Information

The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences . Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website .

Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at https://www.grants.gov .

About The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."

NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.E.6 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.

ABOUT THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) mission is to uncover new knowledge that will lead to better health for everyone. NIH works toward that mission by conducting research in its own laboratories; supporting the research of non-Federal scientists in universities, medical schools, hospitals, and research institutions throughout the country and abroad; helping in the training of research investigators; and fostering communication of medical information. The NIH institutes and centers participating in this program contribute to NIH's mission through research efforts aimed at understanding, treating, and preventing disease states that involve or are related to the nervous system.

• The mission of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) is to seek fundamental knowledge about the brain and nervous system and to use that knowledge to reduce the burden of neurological disease. NINDS supports research projects that range from basic studies of the nervous system to Phase III clinical trials. Through the CRCNS program, NINDS will not support definitive clinical trials of therapeutic devices, such as a traditional feasibility study and/or pivotal trial (see https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/medical-device-accessories-describing-accessories-and-classification-pathways for the definition of an early feasibility study, feasibility study and pivotal trial). The NINDS is interested in supporting collaborative research in innovative computational analysis, simulation and modeling of physiological and pathological structures and functions of the nervous system, and mechanisms underlying neurological neuromuscular and neurovascular disorders.
• The mission of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) is to transform the understanding and treatment of mental illnesses through basic and clinical research, paving the way for prevention, recovery, and cure. NIMH supports research programs in neuroscience and basic behavioral science, genomics, technology development, translational research, global mental health, and services and intervention, please see: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/research-priorities/research-areas/index.shtml . The NIMH Strategic Plan for Research provides a broad roadmap for the Institute’s research priorities, encompassing a range from fundamental science of the brain and behavior to public health impact. For specifics about the NIMH strategic plan for research, please see: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/research-priorities/index.shtml .
• National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) supported research is aimed at increasing the understanding of the causes and consequences of substance use disorders (SUDs), and in how to prevent and treat them. NIDA supports a broad research program in basic and clinical neuroscience research ranging from molecular biology to cognition, including studies investigating fundamental behavior and brain circuitry relevant to substance use. NIDA is also interested in research on the co-morbidity of SUDs with other psychiatric disorders, and understanding interactions between substance use and HIV. NIDA is also interested in advancing research on the social determinants of health related to brain development, substance use, and addiction.
• The National Eye Institute (NEI) supports basic and clinical research aimed at increasing our understanding of the eye and the visual system in normal health and disease.
• The National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) supports biomedical and behavioral research related to normal and disordered processes of hearing, balance, smell, taste, voice, speech and language. Basic and clinical studies of genetic, molecular, cellular, physiological, biochemical, and behavioral aspects of function in health and disease are encouraged.
• The National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) supports research and development of new and novel computational methods for modeling, simulation and analysis for the purpose of detecting, treating, and preventing disease. For projects developing computational methods for image analysis and post-processing, where the computation is not linked to the direct testing or generation of a neuroscience hypothesis, please refer to the NIBIB program for image processing: https://www.nibib.nih.gov/research-funding/image-processing-visual-perception-and-display .
• The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) supports basic, clinical and behavioral research to increase the understanding of normal and abnormal biological functions and behavior relating to alcohol use, to improve the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of alcohol use disorders, and to enhance quality health care to reduce the burden of alcohol abuse and addiction.
• The National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) supports research using scientific methods and advanced technologies (e.g., fMRI, MRI, PET) to study a diverse array of complementary medical and health care systems, practices (e.g., mindfulness-based interventions, music-based interventions, force-based manipulations, thermotherapies, meditative movement-based interventions) and natural product interventions (e.g., microbial-based therapeutics including probiotics, microbial metabolites, botanicals and related dietary supplements, and animal-derived peptides and toxins) with the goal of understanding their potential contribution to whole person health, pain, emotional well-being, and other symptoms. In addition, the NCCIH supports the integration of the technologies with multiple physiological studies to understand the connections and interactions across the systems involving brain and the rest of the nervous system such as interoception, and/or the impact of multi-component interventions on multisystem connections and interactions in pre-clinical models. Inclusive in this goal is to support collaborative computational approaches to study genetic, molecular, and neuroimaging, neurobiological and behavioral data that can be combined and brought to bear on understanding the underlying mechanisms of action of these complementary and integrative health approaches.
• The mission of the National Institute on Aging (NIA) is to seek to understand the nature of aging and the aging process, and diseases and conditions associated with growing older, in order to extend the healthy, active years of life. NIA supports and conducts genetic, biological, clinical, behavioral, social, and economic research on aging. Aging Well in the 21st Century: Strategic Directions for Research on Aging is NIA's roadmap for progress in aging research and outlines the Institute's goals and vision. The NIA Division of Neuroscience supports basic, clinical and epidemiological research to understand the neural and behavioral processes associated with the aging brain. Research on Alzheimer's disease and related dementias of aging is of particular interest.
• The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) supports the full spectrum of basic, clinical, and translational research in the biomedical and behavioral neuroscience arenas, particularly as they affect developing systems and rehabilitation.

For the latest information about NIH programs, visit the NIH website at http://www.nih.gov/ .

ABOUT THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

The mission of the Department of Energy (DOE) is to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions. The DOE Office of Science (SC) mission is to deliver scientific discoveries and major scientific tools to transform our understanding of nature and advance the energy, economic and national security of the United States. SC is the Nation’s largest Federal sponsor of basic research in the physical sciences and the lead Federal agency supporting fundamental scientific research for our Nation’s energy future. Within SC, the Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program’s mission is to advance applied mathematics and computer science; deliver the most sophisticated computational scientific applications in partnership with disciplinary science; advance computing and networking capabilities; and develop future generations of computing hardware and software tools for science and engineering in partnership with the research community, including U.S. industry. ASCR supports state-of-the-art capabilities that enable scientific discovery through computation.

ABOUT THE FEDERAL MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND RESEARCH (GERMANY)

Research and development in areas such as chemistry and materials science, semiconductors, laser and plasma technology together with the latest production processes are the basis for new technological developments of tomorrow. The Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) provides financial support for innovative projects and ideas under targeted research funding programmes. The range covers everything from basic scientific research, environmentally friendly sustainable development, new technologies, information and communication technologies, the life sciences, work design; structural research funding at institutions of higher education to innovation support and technology transfer. Research funding supports scientific institutions and enterprises. The BMBF also funds individual researchers via special funding institutions.

ABOUT THE FRENCH NATIONAL RESEARCH AGENCY

The French National Research Agency is a public organization devoted to competitive project-based funding in both fundamental and applied research. Its objectives are to promote scientific and technological development. The ANR mission is to concentrate the research efforts on national societal and economic priorities while maintaining a good balance between fundamental and applied research. It funds all science and technology areas.

ABOUT THE U.S.-ISRAEL BINATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

The U.S.-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF) promotes scientific relations between the U.S. and Israel by supporting collaborative research projects in a wide area of basic and applied scientific fields, for peaceful and non-profit purposes. The foundation is owned equally by the two governments, and financed by endowments created by both governments. The BSF is an independent organization, and is governed by a board of governors consisting of equal numbers of U.S. and Israeli members. Since its creation in 1972, it has supported over 5000 joint U.S.-Israeli research projects. 45 Nobel Laureates, 7 Turing Laureates, and 7 Fields Medal Laureates have participated in BSF-supported projects.

ABOUT THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY (JAPAN)

As the sole public institution in Japan to specialize in ICT, the National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NICT) engages in the full spectrum of research and development in ICT from basic to applied research with an integrated perspective. Additionally, NICT supports the wider ICT sector through research funding and promoting collaboration with the academic and business communities in Japan as well as with research institutes overseas.

ABOUT THE STATE RESEARCH AGENCY (SPAIN)

The State Research Agency (AEI) is a Spanish agency responsible for the promotion of scientific and technical research in all areas of knowledge through the competitive and efficient allocation of public resources, the monitoring of actions financed and their impact, and advice on action planning or initiatives through which the R&D policies of the General State Administration are implemented. The Agency is attached to the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities through the auspices of the Spanish Secretariat of State for Universities, Research, Development and Innovation.

The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314 (NSF Information Center) (703) 292-5111 (703) 292-5090 Send an e-mail to: or telephone: (703) 292-8134 (703) 292-5111 Privacy Act And Public Burden Statements The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by proposers will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding proposers or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See System of Record Notices , NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records.” Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne H. Plimpton Reports Clearance Officer Policy Office, Division of Institution and Award Support Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management National Science Foundation Alexandria, VA 22314 Research Laboratory Tech Sr/Inter/Assoc - Term Limited - Chang How to apply. A cover letter is required for consideration for this position and should be attached as the first page of your resume. The cover letter should address your specific interest in the position and outline skills and experience that directly relate to this position. Job Summary The Chang lab, in the Department of Microbiology and Immunology, is recruiting a full-time Research Laboratory Technician to conduct independent research in investigating the role of iron T cells. The role encompasses experimental and non-experimental responsibilities. We are a basic science lab, within the University of Michigan Medical School, focusing on investigating the molecular and cellular mechanisms that govern immune function. The successful applicant will be able to consult the literature or other scientists to determine the course of their own experiments, with input from the PI, and participate in the design of research goals, approaches, and alternative approaches.  They will balance this research activity with functional lab management and supervisory responsibilities.  Contributions to our research projects will result in co-authorship on publications whenever appropriate. The position offers opportunities for growth in leadership and research skills.  Attendance at research seminars is highly encouraged. Mission Statement Michigan Medicine improves the health of patients, populations and communities through excellence in education, patient care, community service, research and technology development, and through leadership activities in Michigan, nationally and internationally.  Our mission is guided by our Strategic Principles and has three critical components; patient care, education and research that together enhance our contribution to society. Why Join Michigan Medicine? Michigan Medicine is one of the largest health care complexes in the world and has been the site of many groundbreaking medical and technological advancements since the opening of the U-M Medical School in 1850. Michigan Medicine is comprised of over 30,000 employees and our vision is to attract, inspire, and develop outstanding people in medicine, sciences, and healthcare to become one of the world’s most distinguished academic health systems.  In some way, great or small, every person here helps to advance this world-class institution. Work at Michigan Medicine and become a victor for the greater good. What Benefits can you Look Forward to? Excellent medical, dental and vision coverage effective on your very first day 2:1 Match on retirement savings Responsibilities* Consulting primary literature, design, execute experiments, and evaluate results.  Suggest modifications to experimental design, controls, and alternative explanations of the data. Coordinate collaborations with other laboratories for acquiring data and sharing information related to the research.  Prepare data tables and figures for sharing in collaborative projects. Oversee breeding colonies of a dozen mouse lines, including husbandry and record-keeping, maintenance of mouse colony, and compliance with safety and health requirements. Train research technicians, undergraduates, and postdocs in laboratory procedures, including primary cell preparation and culture, and analysis by flow cytometer; RNA, DNA and protein preparations and analysis. Ensure that documentation of lab inventions and protocols, safety records, hazardous waste, and radioactivity use complies with university and federal regulations. Coordinate lab safety training for individuals. Maintain lab personnel work and ensure its appropriately conducted and documented. Maintain laboratory equipment, manage and order lab supplies, and manage the disposal of hazardous and radioactive waste. Prepare oral and written data for sharing with other researchers. Attend meetings and present research findings. Draft primary research articles and review articles. Assist in the preparation of grant proposals. Evaluate the research design, hypotheses, data interpretation, and presentation for grant applications. Required Qualifications* Senior level - Bachelor's degree in biology or related field with a minimum of 2 years of relevant laboratory research experience in molecular biology, immunology, microbiology. An equivalent combination of education and experience may be accepted, including relevant undergraduate and graduate student experience.    Intermediate level - Bachelor's degree in biology or a related field with 1 year of laboratory research experience in molecular biology, immunology, microbiology. An equivalent combination of education and experience may be accepted, including relevant undergraduate and graduate student experience.  Associate level - Associate's or Bachelor's degree in biology or a related field is required.   Requirements for all classification levels - The candidate must be open to working with experimental mice. Modes of Work Positions that are eligible for hybrid or mobile/remote work mode are at the discretion of the hiring department. Work agreements are reviewed annually at a minimum and are subject to change at any time, and for any reason, throughout the course of employment. Learn more about the work modes . Underfill Statement This position may be underfilled at a lower classification depending on the qualifications of the selected candidate. Additional Information This is a term limited position expected to end October 31, 2025.  An extension is possible but is based on the availability of funding. At the end of the stated term, your appointment will terminate, and will not be eligible for Reduction-in-Force (RIF) benefits.  This term-limited appointment does not create a contract or guarantee of employment for any period of time as you will remain subject to disciplinary or other performance measures, up to and including termination, at the will of the University in accordance with existing University policy and standards for employee performance and conduct. Background Screening Michigan Medicine conducts background screening and pre-employment drug testing on job candidates upon acceptance of a contingent job offer and may use a third party administrator to conduct background screenings.  Background screenings are performed in compliance with the Fair Credit Report Act. Pre-employment drug testing applies to all selected candidates, including new or additional faculty and staff appointments, as well as transfers from other U-M campuses. Application Deadline Job openings are posted for a minimum of seven calendar days.  The review and selection process may begin as early as the eighth day after posting. This opening may be removed from posting boards and filled anytime after the minimum posting period has ended. U-M EEO/AA Statement The University of Michigan is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer. Clinical Research Coordinator Madison, Wisconsin SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH/RADIOLOGY-GEN Partially Remote Staff-Full Time Staff-Part Time Opening at: May 31 2024 at 09:55 CDT Closing at: Sep 17 2024 at 23:55 CDT Job Summary: The Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin - Madison, School of Medicine & Public Health is seeking a Clinical Research Coordinator (CRC) to help advance exciting medical imaging and disease-focused projects! The CRC works as part of a team, which includes physicians, PhD researchers, imaging staff, and other research support staff, to support and advance a portfolio of interesting research projects. Radiology projects focus on anything from the development of novel imaging techniques, to work towards understanding and curing disease. The role of a CRC is quite varied - an average day could include responsibilities ranging from recruiting and enrolling subjects into a study, to coordinating and conducting actual subject visits, to collaborations with the study team on a wide variety of topics. Responsibilities: Institutional statement on diversity:. Diversity is a source of strength, creativity, and innovation for UW-Madison. We value the contributions of each person and respect the profound ways their identity, culture, background, experience, status, abilities, and opinion enrich the university community. We commit ourselves to the pursuit of excellence in teaching, research, outreach, and diversity as inextricably linked goals. The University of Wisconsin-Madison fulfills its public mission by creating a welcoming and inclusive community for people from every background - people who as students, faculty, and staff serve Wisconsin and the world. For more information on diversity and inclusion on campus, please visit: Diversity and Inclusion Preferred Bachelor's Degree Qualifications: Required - Research experience. Preferred - At least one year experience with clinical research studies. - Experience working within a higher education setting. - Prior experience working within a healthcare setting. The ideal candidate will have strong attention to detail and ability to think critically and/or strategically to solve problems. Full or Part Time: 80% - 100% This position may require some work to be performed in-person, onsite, at a designated campus work location. Some work may be performed remotely, at an offsite, non-campus work location. The incumbent must have schedule flexibility to occasionally work outside of standard 8:00AM- 5:00PM weekday hours. The position occasionally requires travel to other, local UW locations. Appointment Type, Duration: Ongoing/Renewable Minimum $48,000 ANNUAL (12 months) Depending on Qualifications The starting full time salary for the position is $48,000 but commensurate with experience and qualifications. Actual pay is determined at hire and is based on experience and qualifications. Employees in this position can expect to receive benefits such as generous vacation, holidays, and sick leave; competitive insurances and savings accounts; retirement benefits. Benefits information can be found at ( https://hr.wisc.edu/benefits/ ). Additional Information: Applicants for this position will be considered for the titles listed in this posting. The title is determined by the experience and qualifications of the finalist. This position has been identified as a position of trust with access to vulnerable populations. The selected candidate will be required to pass an initial caregiver check to be eligible for employment under the Wisconsin Caregiver Law and every four years. University sponsorship is not available for this position, including transfers of sponsorship. The selected applicant will be responsible for ensuring their continuous eligibility to work in the United States (i.e. a citizen or national of the United States, a lawful permanent resident, a foreign national authorized to work in the United States without the need of an employer sponsorship) on or before the effective date of appointment. This position is an ongoing position that will require continuous work eligibility. UW-Madison is not an E-Verify employer, and therefore, is not eligible to employ F1-OPT STEM Extension participants. If you are selected for this position you must provide proof of work authorization and eligibility to work. How to Apply: To apply for this position, please click on the "Apply Now" button. You will be asked to upload a current resume/CV and a cover letter briefly describing your qualifications and experience. Amanda Joncas [email protected] 608-262-2716 Relay Access (WTRS): 7-1-1. See RELAY_SERVICE for further information. Official Title: Clin Res Coord I(RE015) or Clin Res Coord II(RE016) Department(s): A53-MEDICAL SCHOOL/RADIOLOGY/RADIOLOGY Employment Class: Academic Staff-Renewable Job Number: The university of wisconsin-madison is an equal opportunity and affirmative action employer.. You will be redirected to the application to launch your career momentarily. Thank you! Frequently Asked Questions Applicant Tutorial Disability Accommodations Pay Transparency Policy Statement Refer a Friend You've sent this job to a friend! Website feedback, questions or accessibility issues: [email protected] . Learn more about accessibility at UW–Madison . © 2016–2024 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System • Privacy Statement Before You Go.. Would you like to sign-up for job alerts. Thank you for subscribing to UW–Madison job alerts! 178 COMMENTS Research Summary Research Summary. Definition: A research summary is a brief and concise overview of a research project or study that highlights its key findings, main points, and conclusions. It typically includes a description of the research problem, the research methods used, the results obtained, and the implications or significance of the findings. How To Write A Research Summary A research summary is a brief yet concise version of the research paper for a targeted audience. Read more to find out about structure of a research summary, tips to write a good research summary, and common mistakes to write a research summary. How to Write a Summary Table of contents. When to write a summary. Step 1: Read the text. Step 2: Break the text down into sections. Step 3: Identify the key points in each section. Step 4: Write the summary. Step 5: Check the summary against the article. Other interesting articles. Frequently asked questions about summarizing. Research Summary: What is it & how to write one A research summary is a piece of writing that summarizes your research on a specific topic. Its primary goal is to offer the reader a detailed overview of the study with the key findings. A research summary generally contains the article's structure in which it is written. You must know the goal of your analysis before you launch a project. Research Summary- Structure, Examples, and Writing tips A research summary is a type of paper designed to provide a brief overview of a given study - typically, an article from a peer-reviewed academic journal. It is a frequent type of task encountered in US colleges and universities, both in humanitarian and exact sciences, which is due to how important it is to teach students to properly interact ... How to Summarize a Paper: Step-by-Step Guide A research paper summary is a short overview of a research paper. Generally, a research paper summary is about 300-400 words long, though with longer papers, they're usually no more than 10 percent the length of the original paper. Research paper summaries play an important role in academia. How to write a research summary A research summary is a concise overview of a research paper or project. It is designed to provide the reader with essential research insights without reading the entire document. Research summaries are commonly required in academic settings and are fundamental in disseminating knowledge concisely. Research Paper Summary: How to Write a Summary of a Research ... A summary must be coherent and cogent and should make sense as a stand-alone piece of writing. It is typically 5% to 10% of the length of the original paper; however, the length depends on the length and complexity of the article and the purpose of the summary. Accordingly, a summary can be several paragraphs or pages, a single paragraph, or ... PDF How to Summarize a Research Article A research article usually has seven major sections: Title, Abstract, Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion, and References. The first thing you should do is to decide why you need to summarize the article. If the purpose of the summary is to take notes to later remind yourself about the article you may want to write a longer summary ... Writing a Summary The research attributes this decline to factors like pollution, reduced green spaces, and increased temperatures in urban areas. Summary: A study analysing the effects of urbanisation on bee colonies found a significant 30% decrease in bee populations in urban settings compared to rural areas. The decline is linked to urban factors such as ... Research Summary: What Is It & How To Write One A research summary is a piece of writing that summarizes the research of a specific topic into bite-size easy-to-read and comprehend articles. The primary goal is to give the reader a detailed outline of the key findings of a research. It is an unavoidable requirement in colleges and universities. To write a good research summary, you must ... What is a Summary? Guide on Definition, Types, and Examples An In-depth Guide on Definition, Types, and Examples. Understanding what a summary contains is fundamental to academic success. It represents a concise restatement of an argument, paper, or lecture's main points, facilitating better understanding, and the ability to highlight connections between concepts. The term 'summary' itself, alongside ... How to Write a Research Paper Summary A research paper summary is a crisp, comprehensive overview of a research paper, which encapsulates the purpose, findings, methods, conclusions, and relevance of a study. A well-written research paper summary is an indicator of how well you have understood the author's work. A Complete Guide to Writing a Research Summary A research summary is a short, concise summary of an academic research paper. It is often used to summarize the results of an experiment, summarize the major findings and conclusions, and provide a brief overview of the methods and procedures used in the study. Effective Summary For Research Paper: How To Write The summary of a research paper is important because it gives your teacher a quick and easy way to understand the paper's main points. Additionally, an effective summary can help you save time when writing a research paper. By writing a summary, you can quickly and easily create a concise version of the paper that can be used as a reference ... What is a summary? A summary is a short overview of the main points of an article or other source, written entirely in your own words. FAQ About us . Our editors; Apply as editor; ... You might synthesize sources in your literature review to give an overview of the field of research or throughout your paper when you want to contribute something new to existing ... Six elements a research summary should include Summarizing a research paper (or papers) sounds like it should be a pretty quick, easy task. After all, how hard can writing 200 words be?! But whether you're writing a summary to include in your essay or dissertation, or you need to draft a compelling abstract for your own paper, distilling complex research into an informative, easy-to-read snapshot can be one of the most daunting parts of ... How to Write Research Summary A research summary or a research article comprehensively covers a topic. It is a brief overview of a study typically from a peer-reviewed journal. Many universities and colleges give such assignments and assess the students' performance based on how they interpret the scientific knowledge and data presented in the written academic article. If ... How to Write a Lay Summary: 10 Tips for Researchers 2. Keep it simple, yet informative. Simplicity is the key to an effective lay summary, so avoid jargon and technical terms that might confuse your readers. Think of it as telling a story rather than presenting scientific data and focus on conveying the core message of your research in straightforward manner. 3. Write a Literature Review Annotated Bibliographies. Annotated bibliographies can help you clearly see and understand the research before diving into organizing and writing your literature review. Although typically part of the "summarize" step of the literature review, annotations should not merely be summaries of each article - instead, they should be critical ... How to Write a Synopsis for Research: A Step-By-Step Guide 1. Format your title page following your instructor's guidelines. In general, the title page of a research synopsis includes the title of the research project, your name, the degree and discipline for which you're writing the synopsis, and the names of your supervisor, department, institution, and university. PDF Summarizing a Research Article Summarizing a Research Article. Research articles use a standard format to clearly communicate information about an experiment. A research article usually has seven major sections: Title, Abstract, Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion, and References. Sometimes there are minor variations, such as a combined Results and Discussion section ... LSBU Library: Literature Reviews: What is a Literature Review? In summary, a literature review is a critical component of academic research that helps to frame the current state of knowledge, identify gaps, and provide a basis for new research. The research, the body of current literature, and the particular objectives should all influence the structure of a literature review. Executive Summary An executive summary is a thorough overview of a research report or other type of document that synthesizes key points for its readers, saving them time and preparing them to understand the study's overall content. It is a separate, stand-alone document of sufficient detail and clarity to ensure that the reader can completely understand the ... Strategic competition in the age of AI Includes Research Summary. Share on LinkedIn; Share on Twitter; Share on Facebook; Email; Artificial intelligence (AI) holds the potential to usher in transformative changes across all aspects of society, economy and policy, including in the realm of defence and security. The United Kingdom (UK) aspires to be a leading player in the rollout of ... The City Beautiful Movement, 1890-1920 Summary. The City Beautiful movement arose in the 1890s in response to the accumulating dirt and disorder in industrial cities, which threatened economic efficiency and social peace. City Beautiful advocates believed that better sanitation, improved circulation of traffic, monumental civic centers, parks, parkways, public spaces, civic art, and ... Collaborative Research in Computational Neuroscience (CRCNS) Project Summary: As with Research Proposals, the statement on broader impacts should address medical relevance if appropriate, and the keyword "CloudAccess" and/or "HTCAccess" should be used to indicate a request for cloud computing and/or high-throughput computing resources as part of the proposal. Research Laboratory Tech Sr/Inter/Assoc Job Summary. The Chang lab, in the Department of Microbiology and Immunology, is recruiting a full-time Research Laboratory Technician to conduct independent research in investigating the role of iron T cells. The role encompasses experimental and non-experimental responsibilities. Clinical Research Coordinator Job Summary: The Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin - Madison, School of Medicine & Public Health is seeking a Clinical Research Coordinator (CRC) to help advance exciting medical imaging and disease-focused projects! The CRC works as part of a team, which includes physicians, PhD researchers, imaging staff, and other research support staff, to support and advance a portfolio of ... Research Project Manager Job Summary: The Research Project Manager provides oversight and planning for the development, implementation, and delivery of research project(s). May supervise staff and provide supervisory guidance to external stakeholders assisting with the project. Additional Department Summary: The Every Step Project is a complementary program to the ... essay homework paper phd project resume review study thesis